THE MYSTERY OF GOOD AND EVIL
From the earliest times, men have been puzzled by the fact that Yahweh allows evil to exist and often overthrow good. Almost the whole of the book of Job deals with this question. Job suffered great affliction and knowing that he had done nothing to deserve it, he saw the wicked flourish. Job 10:2‑3, 21:7‑9 tells of his anguish.
"I will say unto Yahweh, Do not condemn me: show wherefore Thou contendest with me. Is it good unto Thee that Thou shouldest oppress, that Thou shouldest despise the work of Thy hands, and shine upon the counsel of the wicked? Wherefore do the wicked live, become old, yea are mighty in power? Their seed is established in their sight with them, and their offspring before their eyes. Their houses are safe from fear, neither is the rod of Yahweh upon them."
We cannot deny this; evil men do flourish, getting all the cream of this life. The good have much trouble and cannot keep the things they create, why is this?
The problem of good and evil confronted our race from the beginning. We were made for a purpose, this purpose was to not only live by, but also enforce the laws of Yahweh.
Participation in the evils of the older races was not for us. Adam and Eve were told,
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:17)
The assumption today is that the acquisition of knowledge should be everyone’s goal. Often the fact is not considered that knowledge in itself can be both good and evil. Certainly it has been many times demonstrated that knowledge which otherwise is good can, through misuse, produce suffering and bring on direful consequences. Knowledge obtained by the unrighteous, or even in the hand of the immature, can spell disaster for all. However, knowledge given to the godly can be made to benefit and bless our Israel people and through them all mankind.
A case in point is the achievement of scientists in discovering how to split the atom and release its energy. Possessed by tyrants and aggressors, this knowledge bodes ill for all; even the possible extinction of civilization. On the other hand, this information could be used by the righteous to usher in an utopian age by the harnessing of unlimited power and its controlled utilization.
How Adam's original immortality was lost to him, and all his descendants, we are not told. Perhaps catching some disease, which left hereditary defects, lost it. Adam did die within the prophetic day of 1,000 years, from the time he participated in the evils of the older races. Evil was not new to the world when Adam and Eve were put here, it was their job to curb it and to demonstrate good.
The old races of Asia, Africa and India then, as today also worshiped devils, Satan and the fallen angels who followed him into rebellion. Both the Old and New Testaments affirm this. Deuteronomy 32:17 tells us,
"They sacrificed to devils, not to Yahweh: to gods whom they knew not."
1 Corinthians 10:20 goes on to say,
"But I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to Yahweh: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils."
Within the range of human experience, it is often stated of the immature, “They are too young to be given such information. When they are older and better able to use it aright, it can be passed on to them, but not before that.”
Was this an operating principle when god plated in the Garden of Eden two “trees;” one the Tree of Life and the other the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 2:9), leading Him to command Adam and Eve that they were not to participate of either one? The very fact that these trees were within the reach of our first parents would indicate that a time was to come when they would become accessible to them. However, the circumstances implied that to partake of either before they had attained spiritual maturity would be disastrous, as it was prophesied (Genesis 2:17) and as subsequent events clearly revealed.
Now some folks have a lot of trouble understanding that many of the “trees” in the Garden were people, but the following verse should prove to anyone that many times the word “tree” in the Bible is used to indicate people:
“For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and ALL THE TREES OF THE FIELD SHALL CLAP THEIR HANDS.” (Isaiah 55:12)
Satan was not a scaly snake; wriggling along the ground he was a mighty angel. The word‑mistranslated serpent is the Hebrew word naw‑kash, meaning enchanter or magician, which his angelic powers enabled Satan to be. Later, Satan's children and followers adopted the serpent as their emblem or symbol and from this later tradition the mistranslation came about.
In Genesis 3:5 Satan told Eve,
"In the day ye eat thereof, (speaking of the tree of knowledge of Good & Evil) then your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."
In everyday terms that would mean,
"Wouldn't you like to be worshiped as gods, as my followers and I are? I'll show you how. These people are a rough, tough bunch. You poor innocents don't know how to get along with them. You have to be tougher than they are and know more about it than they do, that's how I make them worship me."
However, evil always brings eventual judgment. Evil was the cause of the catastrophes by which the ancient continents of Lemuria and Atlantis sank beneath the great oceans. Our race was put here, not to learn wickedness, but to compel everyone to stop it.
It is evident from the very fact that Yahweh walked and talked with Adam and Eve in the Garden that they were being schooled in a process of training under Divine instruction, preparation to coming responsibilities they were very likely to assume when they came to spiritual maturity.
It is evident also that Yahweh intended to grant access in due course of time to the very trees planted in the midst of the Garden which, for the time being, they were forbidden to partake of. Otherwise, there would have been no purpose in placing them there and making this fact known to Adam.
Why were we left so susceptible to temptation? We are the children of Yahweh, created to become His companions. Yahweh could have made us mere robots, which never sinned because we lacked the capacity to do so, and then wouldn't we have been a rather stuffy lot? He wanted children who were loyal and good, not to be good because they lacked the power to be otherwise, but because they were fine enough to choose loyalty and goodness.
“Haran was forty‑two years old when he begat Sarai, which was in the tenth year of the life of Abram; and in those days Abram and his mother and nurse went out from the cave, as the king and his subjects had forgotten the affair of Abram. And WHEN ABRAM CAME OUT FROM THE CAVE, HE WENT TO NOAH AND HIS SON SHEM, AND HE REMAINED WITH THEM TO LEARN THE INSTRUCTION OF THE LORD AND HIS WAYS, and no man knew where Abram was, and Abram served Noah and Shem his son for a long time. And Abram was in Noah's house thirty‑nine years, and Abram knew the Lord from three years old, and he went in the ways of the Lord until the day of his death, as Noah and his son Shem had taught him; and all the sons of the earth in those days greatly transgressed against the Lord, and they rebelled against him and they served other gods, and they forgot the Lord who had created them in the earth; and the inhabitants of the earth made unto themselves, at that time, every man his god; gods of wood and stone which could neither speak, hear, nor deliver, and the sons of men served them and they became their gods. (Jasher 9:4-6)
There has been a great deal of speculation as to what these “trees” imply and the nature of their “fruit.” From Genesis 3:6 we observe that the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil appealed to the appetite, was pleasant to the eyes and one to be desired in order to make one wise. (What wooden tree can impart knowledge of any kind?) Nevertheless, the expression “to eat of” may have a meaning other than consuming food. We have the record in Revelation of John’s experience when he was told to “eat” the “little book:”
Thus, in the symbolism of EATING the book, John who typified the people at the time of the Reformation, came into a knowledge and understanding of the Scriptures, which had become a small book as the result of the invention of the printing press. He found its truth sweet in his mouth but bitter after he had digested its full import. Thus, the knowledge the Reformation saints secured from their assimilation of the truths of the Word of God brought home to them the realization that there was much yet to be done before the age could close.
Therefore, the Angel said:
“Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.” (Revelation 10:11)
The result was that, following the Reformation, the missionary movements were born and the Gospel was carried to the ends of the earth in fulfillment of this prediction. It was essential work that had to be accomplished before the ending of the age.
It is very likely in this same sense that the expression is used in Genesis concerning the “eating” of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Thus, to partake of that tree was to obtain understanding which up to that time Adam and Eve did not possess.
In the book, Soul and Spirit, by Jessie Penn-Lewis, the following is stated:
“When Adam walked in the Garden of Eden, the spirit breathed into him by God dominated his ‘soul;’ i.e., intellect, mind, will, and THROUGH THE VESSEL OF THE ‘SOUL’ shone out in, and through, the earthly tabernacle of clay; the body, making it luminous with light, impervious to cold and heat, and able to perfectly fulfill the object of creation.
“But; alas that a ‘but’ has to be written, man fell, and after a time the result was seen as described by the Lord Himself in His words, ‘Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.’ (Genesis 6:5, R.V.) The ‘Fall’ apparently began in the intellectual department of the soul, for it is said that Eve saw that ‘the tree was to be desired TO MAKE ONE WISE.’ (Genesis 3:6, R.V.)
“The appeal of the serpent was not made to the vessel of clay, or the outer man, for the body was then perfectly dominated by the Spirit; but it was based on a lawful desire to advance in knowledge and power in the unseen realm of another world. ‘Ye shall be as God,’ said the serpent, not ‘ye shall be AS THE BEAST,’ created by God. The temptation was KNOWLEDGE, and the very knowledge which probably God meant to give in due season, but grasped before its time and out of God’s will...
“The full effect of the downfall we do not see until years afterward, when the record of the condition of the race shows that the road down was rapid, for the ‘wisdom’ which gave knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden reached it ultimate in due course, in a complete sinking into ‘flesh,’ so that the part of man’s tripartite nature which he had in common with the animal creation obtained the upper hand.
“Then it was that God looked down upon the fallen race, and said, ‘My spirit shall not abide in man...for in their going astray they are flesh.’ (Genesis 6:3, R.V.m.) And so it is, that not only has ‘death reigned’ over the fallen race of Adam, but every human being born in the likeness of the first Adam, is of the ‘earth, earthy,’ and is dominated by the flesh instead of the spirit; the soul, which is the personality of ‘himself’ (See Luke 9:23) a slave of the flesh and the earthly life, instead of being a handmaid of the spirit.” (Soul and Spirit, pp. 5-6)
In the Apocalypse of Baruch, chapter 56, the results of Adam’s transgressions are listed:
“For since when he transgressed, untimely death came into being, and grief was named, and anguish was prepared, and pain was created, and trouble consummated, and disease began to be established, and Sheol to demand that it should be renewed in blood, and the begetting of children was brought about, and the passing of parents produced, and the greatness of humanity was humiliated, and goodness languished.” (The Apocalypse of Baruch 56:6)
The consequences of disobedience multiplied their influence until man became dominated by physical urges rather than spiritual impulsions. Apparently, up to the time of Adam and Eve’s disobedience, they were completely innocent of the functions of six. Satan’s beguiling of Eve gave her, and Adam with her, KNOWLEDGE that opened the floodgates of physical desire. It was, as Baruch indicates, the birth of passion. Knowledge had been acquired that was both good and evil, for the misuse of sex is evil.
Yet, we know that God intended for us to procreate because He said:
“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.” (Genesis 1:28)
Again God said a second time:
“And GOD BLESSED NOAH AND HIS SONS, AND SAID UNTO THEM, BE FRUITFUL, AND MULTIPLY, AND REPLENISH THE EARTH.” (Genesis 9:1)
In the ensuing degeneration in morality from age to age since the fall, a tremendous toil has been taken in misery and crime, in violence and in death.
Satan and his followers had also been made with freedom to choose either right or wrong. Before Adam was even put on this earth, Satan and his followers abused that freedom. That didn't change Yahweh's mind, He still wanted His children to have free will, and therefore we had to learn the first lesson, the consequences of our own sins.
True, Yahweh foresaw man's sins and made provision for man's salvation before the foundation of the world, however man had to be allowed to suffer the consequences long enough to make the lesson effective.
Do not be misled by another serious mistranslation in the King James Bible, this is the use of the word evil, when the Hebrew word carried no such meaning. Many have been misled by Isaiah 45:7, which in the King James Bible reads as follows,
"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace and create evil. I Yahweh, do all these things."
Yahweh never creates evil, in the modern sense of the word meaning, wickedness. The Hebrew word used in that verse is 'rah,' meaning calamity, affliction, adversity, wretchedness or sorrow, but never meaning wickedness. Yahweh said, "I make peace and create calamity," calamity as a punishment for wickedness.
Why do we need to have the lesson rubbed in so bitterly? Because far more than our own conduct is at stake, we are eventually to be the administrators of Yahweh's kingdom, over the whole universe and it will begin on this earth. Revelation 2:25‑27 states,
"He that overcometh and keepeth My works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of My Father."
It is even greater than this as Isaiah 9:7 tells us,
"Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end."
Surely this one little planet has no room for perpetual increase. Hence, Yahshua also says in Revelation 3:21,
"To him that over cometh will I grant to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame and am set down with My Father in His throne."
That throne rules the whole universe.
One of the first lessons we must learn is that which our leaders violate so willfully today. There can't be any such thing as peaceful coexistence of good and evil, for one must inevitably destroy the other. Adam's job was to attack, defeat and expel Satan, instead he tried peaceful coexistence and you are paying the penalty for this today.
One example of this folly is trying to coexist with communism; another is trying to coexist with crime, greed, and low standards of character. Why do we have so many robberies, burglaries, murders and rapes? Because we don't get rid of the kinds of people who do these things. The Bible repeatedly warns us not to let such people live.
The book of Deuteronomy lists many offenses, including habitual crime, for which Yahweh commands death. Yahweh gives no alternative, saying in Deuteronomy 19:19‑20,
"So shalt thou put the evil away from you. And those which remain shall hear and fear and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you."
Instead, we let professional sob sisters get us all worked up emotionally over the plight of the poor criminal. I have never heard one of these characters get sentimental once over the troubles of the victim who was robbed or murdered. We coddle our criminals, we always make sure we keep a good supply of them on hand, and then we wonder why we have lots of crime.
Then there are also the people who make it always harder for us to earn a living. They stick together; they gain control of one industry and business after another. Finally we can't buy food or clothing, furniture or medicine, unless it has passed through their hands and had the price risen. They reduce us to slavery economically, just as surely as communism, led by the same people, would enslave us by force.
Following the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden, the cycle of life and death began to operate upon the earth. (It is a biological fact that among certain types of insect life, the male dies after mating) The whole human race began to tread the downward path to death and dissolution. However, the Lord promised that a REDEEMER would come and those who would accept His call as Savior would be rescued from destruction.
There are those who undertake to suggest that when Eve succumbed to the serpent’s temptation, Satan became the father of Cain. Which is well proven in the Scriptures that this is exactly what happened, and that the people who are called Jews today are the descendants of him.
Satan had slyly aroused a dormant phase of human nature y making the desires of the flesh irresistible to Eve.
The pristine state of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, the Garden of God, is in a measure exemplified by the unconcern of little children about one another when unclothed.
The Lord walked again in the Garden and called to Adam: “Where art thou?” Adam answered:
“I hear thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.” (Genesis 3:10)
To this the Lord rejoined,
“Who told thee that thou wast naked?”
From Adam’s statement we know that knowledge was imparted to Adam and Eve that awakened them to the fact that they were naked. The Lord asked,
“Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that you shouldest not eat?”
Adam replied that the woman had given him of the tree and he did eat, thus again confirming what is stated above, that whatever Eve did, Adam did also.
It was so with Adam and Eve prior to the fall:
“They were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” (Genesis 2:25)
It was not until later, after the devil seduced Eve that they become ashamed in each other’s presence.
After their fall into temptation, the state of innocence passed and the record states:
“The eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.” (Genesis 3:7)
But this was not enough for God decided that their whole body needed to be covered properly and so God had to make them a covering for their sexual organs:
“UNTO ADAM ALSO AND TO HIS WIFE DID THE LORD GOD MAKE COATS OF SKINS, AND CLOTHED THEM. 22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, TO KNOW GOOD AND EVIL: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.” (Genesis 3:21-23)
The Lord had challenged the woman and she countered, “The SERPENT beguiled me, and I did eat.”
Now the Hebrew word “nasha,” translated “beguiled,” means “to lead astray;” that is, “to mentally delude or morally seduce, to utterly deceive.” From the facts given we know that, because Adam did exactly what Eve had done, it was moral corruption in the sense of the word “seduce.”
Serpent
"Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he {serpent} said unto the woman {Eve}, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden." (Genesis 3:1)
Snakes are to be feared, and it is not abnormal to fear them. To prove that even such Godly men as Moses were/are afraid of snakes, we present the following from the Book of Exodus.
We begin with Moses standing before the burning bush:
"...the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he {Moses} said, A rod. And He {God} said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses FLED from before it." (Exodus 4:2‑3)
So we can see that even Moses fled before a serpent/snake! It scared him and he fled from it. Because man has a natural fear of them. Yet here in Genesis Chapter Three, we have Eve having a discourse with a serpent/snake! With no fear. I do not believe it for a minute. I don't know about you, but I do not believe that Eve was having a conversation with a literal snake! Not for a minute. That is simply to far‑ fetched to be believed literally.
If a snake had come up to Eve she would have ran for Adam to protect her from it. She would not have simply stood or sat there and had a casual conversation with it. No! A thousand times No!!! She would not have just sat there and said: "Hello how are you?" or some such nonsense. She simply would not have done that at all.
Serpent is a strange word when we look at it in the scriptures. It is translated from many different words, but it is used 38 times in the Old Testament. And is translated, basically, from four different words.
But let's only deal with one #5175 in Strong's Concordance. It appears 31 times and every time it is translated serpent. Now keep in mind there are three other words that are also translated serpent in the Scriptures. And the total words are used some 71 times in all the Scriptures. 38 times as serpent and about 24 times as dragons.
What is a dragon, you ask. Well this presentation is about serpents not dragons and to get into a long discussion about dragons would take us away from our intended subject. So we shall leave that for others to contemplate. This is because we have a problem here in Genesis 3:1 with Eve talking with this thing called a serpent.
Now the scriptures say the serpent was more subtil. Well what does this word mean. To arrive at a proper answer we will turn to Strong's Concordance again. Which says the word "serpent" is "Nachas" or "naw‑khawsh" (#5175). Which is a non‑ Israelite name according to (#5176) ‑‑ "Nachash;" the same as #5175; the name of two persons appar. non‑Isr. It also means according to #5175 a snake (from its hiss): serpent. From the #5172 which means to hiss, i.e. whisper a (magic) spell; gen. to prognosticate ‑‑ enchanter, learn by experience, diligently observe.
Also, we find the following from the Second College Edition, New World Dictionary of the American Language, p. 1300: 1. A snake, esp. a large or poisonous one. 2. A sly, sneaking, treacherous person. 3. Bible Satan, in the form he assumed to tempt Eve. 4. Music an obsolete, coiled, brass wind instrument of wood covered with leather. The American Dictionary of the English Language, by Noah Webster 1828, Facsimile First Edition, published by the Foundation For American Christian Education relates that serpent means among others: a subtil or malicious person.
The word prognosticate means to: 1. To foretell or predict, esp. from signs or indications. 2. To indicate beforehand. (Second College Edition, New World Dictionary of the American Language, p. 1135). The 1828 American Dictionary relates: 1. To foreshow; to indicate a future event by present signs. A clear sky at sunset prognosticates a fair day. 2. To foretell by means of present signs; to predict. "I neither will nor can prognosticate To the young gaping heir his father's fate." So now we can see that the word "nachash" is linked to foretelling things. Or its linked to witchcraft (whisper a magic spell) and humanism. It's linked to anything, other than the Word of God.
Now let's look again at this word serpent, and we will see that every time it appears in the Bible, it does not mean a serpent/snake. That sometimes it means either a person or a nation. For example when Jacob/Israel was relating the gifts which were given to the various tribes of Israel we find the following: "Dan shall be a SERPENT by the way, an ADDER {snake} in the path, that biteth the horse heels..." (Genesis 49:17)
Is someone going to try to convince us that Dan was to become a snake. I don't think so. Do you? It is merely a figure of speech. It means that the tribe of Dan would, or the people of the tribe of Dan would display the attributes of being sly, cunning, deceitful.
The wicked are described as serpents-snakes:
"THE WICKED are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of a SERPENT: They are like THE DEAF ADDER that stoppeth her ear." (Psalm 58:3‑4)
Evil and violent men are described as serpents:
"Deliver me, O Lord, from THE EVIL MAN: preserve me from THE VIOLENT MAN; Which imagine mischiefs in their heart; continually are they gathered together for war. THEY have sharpened their tongues LIKE A SERPENT; ADDERS' poison is under their lips. Selah." (Psalm 140:1‑3)
Thus we can see by these verses, anyone who is evil or wicked is described as being a serpent or snake.
Now let's examine nations because they are also very important to this presentation. Turn to the Book of Isaiah where we find:
"In that day the Lord with His sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing SERPENT, even leviathan that crooked SERPENT; and He shall slay the dragon that is in the sea." (Isaiah 27:1)
We see here that the Leviathan is a crooked and piercing serpent. It appears this is an allegory, talking about the enemies of Israel.
The nations that came against Israel are compared to this thing which is also described as a serpent. And it appears that this would be a reference to the Grecian, Turkish and Roman Empires of that day. This is generally accepted when one looks at the narratives of the Bible.
Now let's look at Jeremiah 8:17 for another:
"For, behold, I will send SERPENTS, cockatrices, among you, which will not be charmed, and they shall bite you, saith the Lord."
Here again we are not talking about actual serpents/snakes. Not at all. We are talking about nations which will becoming against Israel. They will not be charmed and they will bite you. At this point some will ask what do you mean they will not be charmed.
For an answer turn to the Book of Second Kings Chapter Seventeen we find Assyria came against what was left of Israel, and they told the Assyrians they would pay them a ransom if they would not come in and harm them. That's charming them is it not?
But if they will not be charmed, then they will not accept their money, gold, silver or other valuables. They will come in and bite you and destroy you. That is what Jeremiah is telling them. So we can clearly see, THEY ARE NOT SERPENTS AT ALL, they are the enemy of Israel, who will come against them.
There is another like story in Amos 9:3 and another in Isaiah 14:29. Those are good stories and you should read them very carefully.
We find allegories being used all through the Scriptures. No one has a problem with Juda being called a lion's whelp (Genesis 49:9); Zebulun as a foal and an ass's colt (Genesis 49:11); Issachar as a strong ass (Genesis 49:14); Naphtali as a hind {A red deer ‑‑ one that is fully grown} (Genesis 49:21); Joseph as a bough {branch or limb of a tree} (Genesis 49:22); Benjamin as a wolf (Genesis 49:27); All the tribes as a lion (Numbers 23:24; 24:9); Gad as a lion (Deut. 33:20); Dan as a lion's whelp (Deut. 33:22); Jesus as a Lamb (Throughout the Book of Revelation); Israel as a speckled bird (Jeremiah 12:9; A nation of the East as a ravenous bird (Isaiah 46:11); Preachers as fishers (Jeremiah 16:16); Pharaoh King of Egypt as a young lion and a whale (Ezekiel 32:2); a flock as men (Ezekiel:34:30-31) and Herod as a fox (Luke 13:32).
When the word "lion" is used for Judah, we are trying to really emphasize the strength of Judah. And when we use the word "serpent" we think of something sly, wicked, evil, cunning, something that hides from us, has venom, that is strong and dangerous. And that is why the word serpent is used many times as an allegory in the Scriptures.
There are many more allegories which could be presented but we believe this should suffice. Was any of these men such an animal or thing? Of course not! It is simply a description of the characteristics of these separate individuals.
Then we have the false doctrine of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herod described as Leaven (Matthew 16:12).
Thus we can clearly see that it is not at all unusual for a word to be used to illustrate something more impressively. And that is what we are talking about.
Most Judeo-Christians do not have any trouble with any of these in the various verses of Scriptures until we get to Genesis 3:1. For example if we go a little further we find: "... thou shalt bruise His heel." Everyone knows that Scripture. And we find another one "...It shall bruise thy head..." and no one has any problem relating that to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and the evil one {which most people believe to be Satan}. Nobody has a problem with that.
Then: Why is it a problem when someone comes along and says THE SERPENT IS NOT A SNAKE! To some people that is a real problem: THEY WANT THAT SERPENT TO BE A SNAKE!!! And they will scream and rant like a spoiled child if someone disagrees with them.
In our opinion that SERPENT NEVER WAS A SNAKE! In my opinion that serpent was a live flesh and blood person. In my opinion it was no spiritual being, and that is not meant to refute the Satan doctrine at all.
We are simply saying that this thing we had in the flesh, in the body, in the Garden of Eden, WAS NOT AN INVISIBLE, NEGATIVE ENTITY. IT WAS NOT A SNAKE THAT WALKED ON TWO FEET. It was a humanoid. Just like you and I.
Let's look at some of the characteristics of this particular serpent in Chapter Three Verse One. One of the things we know, is that it is more wise (WE KNOW FROM THIS THAT THE ENCHANTER COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE A BLACK MAN AS SOME WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE; FOR THE BLACKS SCORE LOWER ON THE I.Q. SCALE THAN ANY OTHER RACE OR PEOPLE ON EARTH. THEREFORE IT HAD TO BE SOMEONE OF THE ANGELIC, OR SATANIC TYPE) than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. Is that not what it says? There word is subtil but we will deal with that a little later.
What is wisdom a trait of? Can you show us any animal in the animal kingdom which can be wise, that can be sly, that can be crafty? They only do what they do by instinct, they do not do it from reason. No animal operates from reason.
Now one can condition response them, by exposing them to altering good with bad conditions depending upon what they do in response to the stimuli given them. But that is merely training them, that is not teaching them wisdom, that is not teaching them to reason.
Oh, the experiments with monkeys, where some scientists say they have taught a monkey to talk: but again that is only the animal being taught to make certain sounds as a result of varying stimuli given them. That is not the same thing. That is not the same thing as being born with the ability to think and reason.
Another thing about this serpent that everybody agrees upon, is that it walked erect like a man. This is a natural human trait. It is not the natural reaction or trait of any animal, much less a snake. You cannot find this ability in snakes.
They do not stand up. Oh there may be some species which have small legs or the semblance of legs but more than likely, if the scientists would be honest, they are a species of lizard and not a specie of snake. There are some snakes which can raise their heads up quite a bit, but still, they cannot stand erect.
It has been said that apes are a form of the erectus, but that is simply not true. They spend most of their time moving about on both their (hands) and feet.
Oh they can stand erect for short periods of time but their natural position is on all fours. And even when they are standing erect they are bent over, they have a slight hump to their back because that is not their normal stance.
And besides that, can you imagine Eve standing or sitting in the Garden of Eden and a great harry ape suddenly dropping out of a tree beside her and speaking to her. She would have been gone like a bolt of lightening. She would not have stayed there with such an animal.
Now the third thing about this serpent was the ability to talk. To speak like a man. Well things are getting worse all the time for those who want that serpent to be a snake.
There has NEVER been a snake with the ability to talk; not then and not now, nor at any time in the foreseeable future. They simply cannot do so.
They do not even have any vocal cords. Oh some will say what about the ass which spoke to Balaam. Well let's look at it for just a moment.
"And Balaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his ASS, and went with the princes of Moab. And God's anger was kindled because he went: and the Angel of the Lord stood in the way for an adversary against him. Now he was riding upon his ASS, and his two servants were with him. And the ASS saw the Angel of the Lord standing in the way..." (Numbers 22:21‑23)
According to Strong's Concordance the word "ass" or "attuwn" #860 which is the same as "eythan" or "ethan" which means: "from an unused root (mean, to continue); permanence; hence (coner) permanent; spec. A CHIEFTAIN: hard, mighty, rough, strength, strong."
So Balaam was riding upon a strong Chieftain. Not a Jackass as we know. We also find that the word "ass" can also mean a #2544 "chamowr" or "Canaanite." As black men were used to carry burdens and people in ancient times; and some of the Canaanites were black, it is quite possible that Balaam was being carried by a strong black Canaanite Chieftain. Which would explain the "ass'" ability to talk.
Now if we are going to attribute the talking in Genesis Chapter Three of a snake, then it would appear that in this respect Satan has more power than God in that he was able to make a serpent, who has no vocal cords, nor any organs capable of making or forming words, speak.
The fourth thing about this serpent, was his gift of reason; which is expressed by his statement "...hath God said." That's reasoning. That's questioning. That's showing an ability to think, to reason. Thus, the serpent had four attributes:
(1) He was wiser {more subtil} than any beast of the field,
(2) He could walk erect,
(3) He could speak, and
(4) He had the ability to think and to reason.
One does not find those things in snakes: Not then and not now. Those traits cannot be found in any animal or snake which has ever existed upon the face of the earth. They are found, only in what we call today, the humanoid species.
Then there is the problem of a snake or an ape coming up to Eve and speaking to her without her running away. It is simply more than we can accept. It could not, it did not happen that way. But he was, whatever he was, more cunning and wiser than any beast of the field. Or any other species of beast.
We can solve all these problems if we recognize that Adam and Eve were the first of the White Race {which we will explain later}. Which would not preclude the existence of other so‑called humanoids existing along with them. That there were other people in the Garden with them is proven with a careful reading of Ezekiel 31.
With this, the problem simply goes away. It does not exist any more, because it would make it possible for another humanoid to exist at the same time as Adam and Eve. This would also make it possible for someone to appear before Eve and not frighten her away. Because she has seen him before, and has probably talked to him before. It would not be a mystery to her, it would be no surprise either.
Suppose that Adam and Eve were the only two people in the whole world and Eve walks around a tree and there is someone there. And it's not Adam! What is she going to do. She is going to scream for Adam and tell him; Adam you are not going to believe what I have found. She would be concerned. No matter what it was, unless it was someone she had seen before.
Now if we assume that the serpent is another humanoid and not a snake, then the problem goes away. Because the other races of the world can walk, talk, think, reason and have wisdom.
The only thing left is what does the word "subtil" mean. Once again let's turn to Strong's Concordance for an explanation. It is #6175 "aruwm" or "aw‑room" and means: cunning (usually in a bad sense), crafty, prudent, subtil. This word "aruwm" has been translated only one time as subtil (Genesis 3:1) and the other ten times it has been translated as crafty or prudent.
Webster's gives a little different spelling, it spells "subtil" as "subtle" and gives the following definitions:
(1) Thin, rare; tenuous; not dense or heavy [a subtle gas].
(2) a) Capable of making or noticing fine distinctions in meaning, etc. [a subtle thinker].
b) Marked by or requiring mental keenness [subtle reasoning].
(3) Delicately skillful or clever; deft or ingenious [a subtle filigree].
(4) Not open or direct; crafty; sly.
(5) Delicately suggestive; not grossly obvious [a subtle hint].
(6) Working insidiously; not easily detected [a subtle poison]. (New World Dictionary of the American Language, Second College Edition, p. 1420‑21)
Webster's 1828 Christian Dictionary gives the following:
(1) Thin; not dense or gross; as subtil air; subtil vapor; a subtil medium.
(2) Nice; fine; delicate. "I do distinguish plain Each subtil line of her immortal face."
(3) Acute; piercing; as subtil pain.
(4) Sly; artful; cunning; crafty; insinuating; as a subtil person; a subtil ADVERSARY.
(5) Planned by art; deceitful; as a subtil scheme.
(6) Deceitful; treacherous.
(7) Refined; fine, acute; as a subtil argument.
Had Eve come into an adversary situation. You bet your boots she did. She had met with a wise adversary; a deceitful and treacherous adversary.
Satan, of course, was not a serpent. The thing that deceived Eve and seduced Eve was not a scaly thing wriggling on the ground. The Hebrew word Nachash means "enchanter" or "magician."
A fallen angel, retaining still a lot of his angelic powers, no doubt could be very much of an enchanter and magician. Now his children, (and I mean children, not just followers) through the centuries used a serpent as a symbol or emblem of their ancestor, until finally they attached a secondary meaning of serpent to the word.
But it is not in the root meaning of the word at all. The Bible was never so ridiculous as to suggest that a snake accomplished all this. In Genesis 3:1‑3, you remember Satan has said to Eve,
"Why, is it really true that God said, You can't eat of any tree in the Garden?"
And she replies to him, (here is how it reads in the Hebrew):
"And the woman said unto the enchanter, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the Garden,"
but (now I am quoting from the King James version and I am going to correct it as I go)
"...of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the Garden, God has said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."
Now let us see what it actually says in the Hebrew: "Fruit" is the Hebrew word "pirchach" meaning progeny, brood, children, descendants. Do you talk about the children of a walnut tree or an apple tree? Of course you don't. Now, of the pirchach, of the descendants, of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, "Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it."
And that word "touch" is the Hebrew word naga, which is a more polite expression, meaning, "to have sexual intercourse with." Do you need to be warned not to have sexual intercourse with an apple? Of course not. It isn't that kind of a tree.
God had millions of the pre‑Adamic Asiatic and African peoples around; if he just wanted somebody wide between the shoulders and narrow between the eyes, to spade up the Garden, he had them. He didn't have to create a special being for that. Satan had been the Governor of this Planet until he forfeited the right to it by rebellion.
God sent Adam here (and you remember that the last verse in the third chapter of the Gospel of Luke tells you that Adam was the Son of God: it doesn't say that about any of these pre‑Adamic peoples mentioned in Genesis chapter 1. Adam was the son of God) and God sent Adam here to take over by force, kick Satan out and govern this Planet.
The trees in the Garden of Eden were the family trees of nations and races. Adam and Eve were supposed NOT to intermingle with these people. If these Negroes and Mongoloids were all that Gad wanted, He already had them. What He created a different and separate being for, was to have a different sort of person, whom the Mongoloids and the Negroids could never produce.
The Hebrew word Awdawm, which we translate Adam, means "of a rosy, fair complexion." Adam was the first person of a specifically created new race. Adam and Eve were told, "Do not mongrelize your race, with these pre‑Adamite peoples in the world."
Now when you come to Genesis 3:13 God has called Adam, Eve and Satan before Him to give an accounting of their misdeeds; and according to your King James Version, Eve says, "The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat thereof." Here again is the Hebrew word Nachash meaning enchanter, but instead of "beguiled" the Hebrew word nawshaw means "seduced."
Now "beguiled" is no more than "deceived." Somebody who sells you some mining stock, in a mine that doesn't have any good ore in it, beguiles you; but this word means seduced. And Yahweh God said unto the woman, "What is this (that) thou hast done?" And the woman said, "The enchanter seduced me."
That is what it says in the Hebrew, and Cain was the product thereof. So in reply, in Genesis 3:15 God says (speaking to Satan):
"I will put enmity between thee (Satan) and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed."
Now the same Hebrew word, "zehra," literally meaning "seed" (and it could be used as grains of wheat for example, but it is used throughout the Bible as meaning the descendants of a person too ‑ children, posterity), between Satan's seed (zehra) and the woman's seed (zehra). In other words Satan was to have just as literal children in this world as was Eve, because the very same word with the very same meaning is used for it.
Our now many Judeo-Christians and some of our own Israel people will say: "Oh that doesn't mean anything, because he quotes Genesis 4:1: "And Adam knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain." Now you notice, what is not said is more significant than what is said.
The Bible nowhere says Adam begat Cain. Remember now, as you have read in the Old Testament, the monotonous regularity with which it always says, "And so‑and‑so begat whozis and whozis begat what's‑his‑name and what's‑his‑name begat somebody‑else," and so on. It was important to know your ancestry in those days, because you didn't get your citizenship for two box tops and a dime: you got it because your ancestors for twenty generations back were Israelites, and no other way.
So Adam knew his wife, and she conceived. Now I can tell you something, and I can prove every bit of it by witnesses: I went to a movie one night and .the next morning the sun rose in the East. Now I did not say the one caused the other. I said two things happened, one of them first and the other second; and they did, but I never said they were cause and effect.
The Bible never says there was cause and effect here. Now if you want further proof out of this, you go right on to the fifth chapter of Genesis which gives the list of Adam's descendants, and you notice that Cain is not mentioned.
Neither Cain nor Abel are mentioned among the descendants of Adam. And if you say Abel might have been omitted, because we don't know, but he was probably killed before he left any descendants of his own. But that is not true of Cain, because the Bible traces Cain's descendants for six generations, naming them on down the line. But never once does it say that Cain was a descendant of Adam: never in any way, shape, form or manner. The first time it says Adam begat a child is Genesis 5:3:
"And Adam lived 130 years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth."
Not Cain.
So the Satanic blood line crept in, definitely, with Cain ‑ possibly earlier among the pre‑Adamic peoples. Now there were pre‑ Adamic peoples who were not necessarily Satanic. There were some pre‑Adamic people into whom the Satanic blood line came and there were even some of the descendants of Adam who probably mongrelized.
In fact, it is evident that they did from the very fact that those living around Noah were wiped out by the flood because the Bible tells you that Noah was perfect in his ancestry (no mongrelization) and he was the only one left in that area who was.
That is why the mongrelized Adamites around him were wiped out by the flood. The real descendants of Adam were multiplied, and then you come to the fact of the Satanic blood line getting in there.
Remember, God had announced His purpose, that He was going to take back the world from Satanic domination, He was going to rule it according to His purposes, and He was going to rule it through His children, going down through Adam.
Now, what is the obvious move on Satan's part to thwart that? Mongrelize the two blood lines, so he can sneer in God's face and say, "These are my children; and where are Yours? All these have my blood in them." And that is exactly what he set out to do.
Genesis 6:2 says,
"The Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all they chose."
Now you don't get the full significance of it in that translation, "the sons of God" (beni‑ha‑ elohim the sons of the Elohim). Now you remember the Hebrew word El (the mighty) is used as a title of God derived from it, eloa (singular) is practically always translated God or a God, and is a correct translation.
Elohim is the plural, meaning Gods. In the 82nd Psalm it says, "God standeth in the congregation of the Gods." He says to them, "I have said Ye are all Elohim, and children of the Most High." Your King James Version just says "Gods" but it is a correct translation of "the Elohim." "The sons of the Elohim saw the daughters of Awdawm that they were fair."
Now the Elohim are the children of God, and to that extent distinct from the angels, who are merely servant spirits. Now we are not given too much detail on the rebellion that took place in Heaven, but the Bible very definitely suggests that along with a number of the angels some even of the Elohim (sons of God) followed Satan into rebellion. Now some people have tried to say, Well, since the Adamite is spoken of as the sons of God, this is merely the Adamites here. But "the sons of God saw the daughters of Adam that they were fair and took them wives of all whom they chose."
And it is written with obvious disapproval. The male descend_ants of Adam were not allowed by God's law to marry anybody but the daughters of Adam; so if they were marrying within their own racial line here, it couldn't have been spoken with disapproval. So the "beni‑ha‑elohim" are evidently of those Elohim who followed Satan into rebellion.
Now you go on into Genesis 6:4 speaking of the same thing, and again it is botched up in your King James Version.
"There were giants in the earth in those days, and also after that when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men and they bare children to them. The same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."
This is what it says in the Hebrew:
"There were Nephilim (the fallen ones) in the earth in those days." They were fallen angels. That is what the Bible calls them in so many places: "angels who had not kept their first estate," who had fallen from Heaven and from their former powers. "When the sons of God," and it's again the beni‑ha‑elohim, "came in unto the daughters of Adam..."
so it's the same thing.
Here you have the spreading of the Satanic blood line, and the Bible in Genesis chapter 6 goes on to trace many of these descendants of the fallen angels. You find that all through Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan River, clear down into Mount Seir, the rugged mountain range southeast of the Dead Sea where Esau and his family lived, all through there you have these various people with the Satanic blood line in them.
Now there are two different places, one in Isaiah, the other in Ezekiel, where it speaks of what it calls a King or Prince, in the one case of Babylon, and the other case of Tyre; but nevertheless, it speaks of him in language which could not possibly apply to anybody except Satan: indicating therefore that at some time or other, Satan had incarnated in the form of these various kings; one king of Babylon, one king of Tyre.
Now don't think that that is so impossible, because, remember the many times that your Old Testament tells of these angels appearing in very solid form. They came and talked with Abraham on several occasions ‑ one of them, you will remember, wrestled with Jacob almost all night.
Another came when the people of Israel were about to cross the Jordan River and takeover Palestine. Joshua, making a scouting trip around his camp, saw this armed man standing there in armor and with sword, and Joshua asked, "Are you with us or for the enemy?" And the man said, "I am the Captain of the Hosts of Yahweh."
So, let us take Isaiah 14: 12‑21 and note that this could not possibly apply to anyone except to Satan himself; and then, taking it out of the King James version too, for the benefit of my friend back in Minnesota,
"How art thou fallen from the heaven, 0 Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations: for thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God. I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north."
He says, "I'm going to be the ruler over Israel (God's people). I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."
But Yahweh God told Lucifer, the devil,
"Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms, that made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof, that opened not the house of his prisoners? All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house; but thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcass trodden under feet. Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people; the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned."
You could not say that about any kings of Babylon. The only one who may possibly have failed to get burial and an elaborate tomb, and all that, might have been Belshazzar: but he was nothing but an incompetent drunkard, and nobody ever could say of him that he was the one who shook kingdoms, and soon. He didn't even rule Babylon. He stayed drunk.
These passages are speaking of none other than Lucifer. Note how it goes on (I am reading from the same passage, Isaiah 14:19-21):
“But thou (Satan, the Devil) art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet. Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned. PREPARE SLAUGHTER FOR HIS (Satan’s, the Devil’s) CHILDREN FOR THE INIQUITY OF THEIR FATHERS...”
And that word translated as "children" is from the Hebrew word "beni" (sons). So, Satan obviously was to have children who could be slaughtered, to keep them from multiplying to the point where they would take over and rule the world. Old Testament? Sure. Now let us see what the New Testament has to say about it.
Christ clearly, and in a number of places, says the devil has children, not mere followers. You remember the parable of the Tares and the Wheat: He spoke of the farmer who sowed good seed in his field, and his enemy came along during the night time and sowed these poisonous weeds ‑ the tares among the wheat; and when the farmer's servants saw the tares growing among the wheat they asked him, "Should we go out and pull them up now?"
And he said, "No, you might pull up some of the wheat with them. Let them grow together until the time of the harvest, and then the reapers will first gather the tares into bundles to be burned, and then put the wheat in my barn."
Then He explains this parable to His disciples. In Matthew 13:38‑39 He says,
"The field is the world; the good seed, are the children of the kingdom (and He uses here the Greek word which is plural of ‘huios,’ meaning sons ‑ the good seed are the sons of the kingdom); "but the tares are the children (same Greek word, huios) of the wicked one."
SO SATAN HAS JUST AS TRUE CHILDREN IN THIS WORLD AS DOES GOD. Again, speaking to the Pharisees (who, as you know, were Jews), in Matthew 12:34 (your King James version botches it up to an extent that seems to me often to be willful), Christ says,
"0 generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.''
But the word is not "generation" at all. A generation is a number of people, of not too different age, living at the same time. You for example constitute one generation. He wasn't talking just about the people living then. They were not any more wicked than the generation that lived before them or the generation that lived after them. What He said was (it's the Greek word genema which means "children"
or "offspring"):
"O CHILDREN OF VIPERS...sure, all these centuries you Jews have used the serpent as the emblem or symbol for your ancestor. All
right, taking you at your word, You children of serpents,"
right down the line ‑ vipers. He knew who they were.
While we are talking about the Jews here, we should also point out that in the parable of the tares and the wheat that Christ said that He never intended for them to convert so that He would have to heal them, and forgive their sins.
“For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; LEST AT ANY TIME THEY SHOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES, AND NEAR WITH THEIR EARS, AND SHOULD UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART, AND SHOULD BE CONVERTED, AND I SHOULD HEAL THEM.” (Matthew 13:15; Mark 4:12; Acts 28:7)
Again Matthew 23:29‑35:
"Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets."
And here again is that Greek word "huios."
"Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye genema (ye offspring, children) of vipers. How can ye escape the damnation of hell? That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom you slew between the temple and the altar."
He was here tracing the children of the serpent; the enchanter, Satan, down through the centuries, who had murdered the righteous, including all the prophets, right down the line.
So He said,
"Upon you (upon this race) these descendants of the serpent, will come the responsibility for all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel even unto the blood of Zacharias."
Now, throughout, the Bible speaks of two seed lines (and I do not mean merely somebody who has been converted to good views or bad). The Bible makes no reference here as to what your religious point of view may be; it is talking about literal descendants. We read in Romans 8:16:
"The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God."
Now, the word children there ‑ the Greek word "teknon" ‑ means one born a child, not adopted. Nothing is more fallacious than this church doctrine about being "adopted" children of God. You read what Paul said on this subject, and nothing in it can justify the mistranslation of that as "adoption."
He says that before the coming of Christ we were held in bondage under the law, governed strictly by the law, and he said we are just like an heir under age. He has inherited from his father, who has died, all the estate: but he is still a minor, and he is not allowed to take control of it.
He is under the control of trustees and governors, appointed guardians, appointed by his Father, until he comes of age. And Paul says, all the time he is the owner of it all, and yet he is controlled as though he is just a servant.
Now you couldn't say that about anybody who was adopted. If you take somebody else's illegitimate child and decide you are going to adopt him, is he already the owner of your property before you adopt him? Of course not.
And Paul wasn't stupid enough to think he was. Only the churchmen are stupid enough for that. Now, what Paul was talking about was the coming of age ceremony by which they marked the fact that the heir had now become of full age and his property was put into his hands to control as an adult.
So here in Romans 8:16:
"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God"
“teknon” one born a child, not adopted. Romans 9:26 (and he is quoting from Hosea 1:10):
"And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God"
and it is that Greek word Huioi ‑ sons. We are the born ‑ not adopted ‑ children of God.
Now as to the born ‑ not adopted (or converted) children of the devil, read Acts 13:8 which tells about a Jew sorcerer, Elymas, who opposed Paul when Paul was trying to make some converts. Then Saul (who also was called Paul) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him and said (in verse 9):
"O full of all subtility and mischief, THOU CHILD OF THE DEVIL (that Greek word Huios ‑ son) THOU SON OF THE DEVIL, THOU ENEMY OF ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS, WILT THOU NOT CEASE TO PERVERT THE RIGHT WAYS OF THE LORD?"
Paul was under no illusion. He knew them to be children of the devil, by perfectly legitimate ancestry, for what it's worth. Now the child of a cat is another cat, isn't it? The child of a Negro is a Negro; and a child of God is what?
Now he is not as wise, and he is not as powerful, and he is not as important as his Father: but nevertheless he partakes (within his limitations) of a godly nature. And that is what the Bible tells us about; and that is exactly why we of God's people Israel are held to so much greater responsibility than other people.
After all, you cannot expect a Negro to act like anything but a Negro, but a child of God is expected to act like one. Now the child of a devil is what? Another devil, isn't he? John 6:70‑71 is part of a very important passage which began in this manner: Jesus asked His disciples who were all gathered there, "Whom do men say that I am?" and they said "Oh some say that you are this prophet or that one who has been reincarnated and come back here."
Then Christ said, "Whom do you say that I am?" and Peter spoke up and said, "Thou are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Christ then said, "Blessed art thou, Simon, son of Jonah: because flesh and blood didn't tell you that fact: it was my Father in heaven who told you that."
And He said, "Upon this rock (Petra, the solid bed‑rock of the earth) I will found My church." Now He didn't say He was going to found it on Simon Peter (Petros), a little stone. In Greek, Petros means a little stone, just barely bigger than a pebble. Was He going to found His church on a pebble that anybody could kick out from under it? No. "I will found it upon Petra," the solid bed‑rock of the earth.
You remember the example He gave, the parable wherein He said one man had built his house on the sand and when the storm came along, the flood washed the sand out from under it and it collapsed; but another man built his house upon the rock (Petra ‑ the bed‑rock) and the storm beat upon it and couldn't do anything to it, because it was founded on a rock {Petra).
If any of you have ever been up to Yosemite Valley and seen that enormous cliff, "El Capitan," you've seen a good example of what the Greeks meant by the word Petra. You could build a castle on that and nothing could blow it off or wash it away. So upon this fact, that you have recognized who I am: the Christ, the Son of the Living God; upon that I will found My church, and the gates of death shall not prevail against it."
John 6:70‑71 says,
"Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and ONE OF YOU IS A DEVIL? He spoke of Judas Iscariot, (the son) of Simon, for he it was that would betray him, being one of the twelve."
Now our Savior was not just being vulgarly abusive and calling people names. He never did that. Oh, He denounced these Pharisees. He called them hypocrites, and they were. He wasn't abusing them with lying epithets. They were hypocrites, and He was accurate.
And when He called them children of serpents, they acknowledged the statement was true, for that was the emblem they had used from ancient times. And when He said that one of them was a devil, He wasn't being abusive, He was speaking the literal truth.
Now the First Epistle of John again states the existence of these two seed lines. First John 2:29:
"If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that does righteousness is born of Him."
First John 3:2: "Beloved, now are we the sons of God (and here we have that Greek word teknon ‑ a born child, not adopted ‑ a born child of God). First John 5:9‑10:
"Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."
Now by that, he didn't mean that none of us commit any sins at all; because, if that is the case, we wouldn't have needed the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. We do all have our sins: but you know people are divided into two classes: the ones who are only sorry because they don't get a chance to sin more, and the others who are sorry because they have sinned a little. So what he means there, is, whoever is born of God doesn't habitually sin. So he says, in verse 10,
"In this the children (that Greek word teknon), the children of God are manifest, and THE CHILDREN (and again it is that same Greek word teknon) OF THE DEVIL."
Remember he has talked about us as the born teknon of God, and the others as the born teknon of the devil.
Now First John 3:12 says that as for those that are our brothers, not the children of Satan, that we should love them and not be as Cain. Your King James version says,
"...WHO WAS OF THAT WICKED ONE, AND SLEW HIS BROTHER."
So the people who have churchianity rather than Christianity say, "Oh well now, you know it doesn't say that he was a son, it just means that Cain was morally associated with Satan and was bad and reprobate, and so on."
As you know, different languages have their different idioms. In many languages one word may have a meaning that can only be expressed by a phrase of several English words. I think nearly all of you have a King James version of the Bible and you know that in most editions of it, some words are printed in italic and those words in italic are the words which the translators added because they thought it was necessary to give the English the same meaning that the Hebrew or the Greek had, without these added words.
The third chapter of Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus Christ, starting with Jesus Christ and running back all the way to Adam. So let us start with Luke 3:23 as it reads in the King James version:
"And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli (but those words ‘the son’ are in italic showing that they were not in the Greek and the translators added them) which was the son of Matthat, (again added in italic), which was the son of Levi (in italics), which was the son of Melchi (italics), which was the son of Janna,"
and so forth; all in italics. Now let us read this the way my friend would read Luke 3:23‑24:
"...the son of Joseph who was as big a reprobate as Heli, who was morally no better than Matthat, who was as bad as Levi..."
Is that the way that he thinks Luke wrote this? And if that is not the meaning of the Greek here in Luke, it is not the meaning of the same Greek phrase over in First John 3:12. So where it says "not as Cain who was of that wicked one," in Greek it means he was the son of that wicked one.
In Greek, if you say John was of William, you will say John was the son of William. Now the better modern translations recognize this. For example, in the Weymouth translation, this same verse, First John
3:12 reads,
"We are not to resemble Cain who was a child of the evil one and killed his brother."
Phillips' translation:
"We are none of us to have the spirit of Cain who was a son of the devil and murdered his brother."
The New English Bible, a magnificent job of translation, by the way:
"Unlike Cain who was a child of the evil one and murdered his brother."
The New International Version says:
“Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him?”
The thing which this gentleman cites in his magazine as the final proof positive that there isn't anything at all to this "Jews are the children of Cain and hence of the devil" theory, is found in the 8th chapter of John, beginning with verse 31.
You know how often I've cited that for you: but the man in Minnesota shows his ignorance. You remember Jesus Christ was talking to Jews (and it says Jews too, comes right out with the word). And it isn't simply that He was behaving like a petulant spoiled child because somebody didn't believe in Him, because it says, "these were Jews who believed in him."
Yes, so‑called "converted Jews." You know all about these missions to the Jews. So these were converted Jews. He says to them (and you can just hear the ring of sarcasm in His voice),
"If ye continue in my doctrines indeed, then you shall be my disciples; and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free."
And immediately they bristle up at this and ask, "What do you mean ‑ make us free?" They say, "We are Abraham's seed and we have never been in bondage to any man." And He says, "I know you are Abraham's seed."
Anyone who knew his Bible (and of a minister it is utterly inexcusable that he does not know it: because, remember, this is the blind leading the blind into the ditch, when an ignorant minister is leading his congregation).
Who was it who could say that he was descended from Abraham and had never been in bondage to any man? If these Jews were of any of the twelve tribes at all, they would have been in bondage the first time in Egypt, wouldn't they? If they belonged to the ten tribed northerly kingdom of Israel, they would have been in bondage a second time in Assyria, wouldn't they?
If they belonged to the two tribed southern kingdom of Judah, they would have been in bondage for the second time, in Babylon, wouldn't they? And they said, "We have never been in bondage to any man," and Jesus Christ admitted the truth of that. He didn't deny that. So they were not of any tribe of Israel whatsoever.
Who could say that, nevertheless, 1,800 years earlier than that, Abraham was one of his ancestors; Esau? Remember Esau and Jacob were twins, born with (presumably) the same blood line: but Esau married two Canaanite women in violation of God's law. Now he couldn't leave anything but mongrelized half‑Satanic descendants, because among these Hittite Canaanites you had the Satanic blood line.
What the Bible tells you about Esau selling his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of lentil stew: that isn't when he lost it. That was merely a formal ceremony by which he gave up any claim to it; but he lost it when he did the thing that rendered it impossible for him to continue as the head of the clan.
His descendants from then on would be mongrelized, half Satanic. So recognizing that he was already out of the line for leadership, he sold it for a bowl of stew. Now the Bible tells you that Esau and his two Canaanite wives moved down to Mount Seir, a very rugged mountain range southeast of the Dead Sea. But Mount Seir is exactly where some of these people lived who were descendants of these fallen angels.
The Bible records that the degradation that became rife during the antediluvian days when the sons of God; i.e., “the angels which kept not their first estate;” saw and desired the beautiful daughters of men and made their selection from among them as wives.
Following this giants were born, bringing into being the violence that filled the earth with corruption prior to the Deluge. The statement is made by Jude:
“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.” (Jude 1:6)
Peter also refers to the angels that sinned:
“God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; and spared not the old world by saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.” (2 Peter 2:4-5)
We are also told in the Book of Jubilees:
“But Noah found grace before the eyes of the Lord. And against which He had created. But Noah found grace before the eyes of the Lord. And against the angels whom He had sent upon the earth, He was exceedingly wroth, and He gave commandment to root them out of all their dominion, and He bade us to bind them in the depths of the earth, and behold they are bound in the midst of them, and are (kept) separate. And against their sons went forth a command from before His face that they should be smitten with the sword, and be removed from under heaven. And He said 'My spirit shall not always abide on man; for they also are flesh and their days shall be one hundred and twenty years.' And He sent His sword into their midst that each should slay his neighbour, and they began to slay each other till they all fell by the sword and were destroyed from the earth. And their fathers were witnesses (of their destruction),
and after this they were bound in the depths of the earth for ever, until the day of the great condemnation, when judgment is executed on all those who have corrupted their ways and their works before the Lord. And HE DESTROYED ALL FROM THEIR PLACES, AND THERE WAS NOT LEFT ONE OF THEM...” (Book of Jubilees 5: 5-11)
Not a word here of a world wide flood; and well there should not have been because Noah’s flood was certainly not world wide.
We are told in Genesis that Noah was perfect in his generation; that is, insofar as Noah was concerned, THERE WAS NO TAINT IN HIS BLOOD OF THE MIXED MARRIAGES THAT HAD TAKEN PLACE IN HIS DAY. However, there is evidence that the mother of Shem and Japheth was NOT the mother of Ham. There is every indication that the mother of Ham was Noah’s wife at the time he entered the Ark, for Ham was the youngest of Noah’s three sons.
Very likely in the bloodsream of Ham’s mother lingered the taint of the forbidden marriages prior to the Deluge. This is an obvious deduction because, in ancient times, it was in the line of Ham outcroppings of the giant strain occurred. It accounts too for the reason why the Lord allowed Ham to perform a rite upon his father after they had come out of the Ark, making it impossible for Noah to father any more children by the wife who was the mother of Ham.
The fact that, after the Deluge, Noah had no more children is clearly indicated in the statement in Genesis 9:28-29 where it is recorded:
“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.”
No statement at all is made here that Noah begat sons and daughters AFTER he came out of the Ark.
After Adam and Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of GOOD and EVIL, God barred the way to the Tree of Life lest, partaking of it, sinful man would acquire unending life, with all the misery this would entail.
Because the way was barred we know that this Tree was not Jesus Christ as the Judeo-Christian clergy would have us believe because God made no restriction or barred the way to become followers of Christ.
We are told that the fruit of the Tree of Life will become available to those who qualify as the result of complying with certain conditions. The Adamic age has been a period of probation. Only those who pass the required tests are to be given the right to the Tree of Life. Those who qualify spiritually, so as to be numbered among the overcomers, will h ave access to the Tree of Life and upon them the Second Death will have no power.
The Apostle John was told:
“To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” (Revelation 2:7)
What Adam and Eve were prevented from doing when the Cherubims guarded the way to the Tree of Life, Spirit filled men and women are going to be invited to do; that is, to partake of the Tree of Life. Thus, while in Adam all die, so in Christ, the second Adam, shall all those called by God, and the message accepted will receive the reward and be accorded the privilege specifically expressed in the 22nd chapter of Revelation, which is the closing chapter of that book?
“Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have the right to the Tree of Life, and may enter in through the gates of the city.”
The Jews are already treating us like slaves in our own land. They forbid us to mention the name of Yahshua in our schools, they use their wealth, their tightly organized group power, and their mastery of the smear technique, to control our politicians and make them oppress the great white Christian majority in the interests of admitted minority groups.
They treasonably plot to destroy our national independence and make us a conquered province of a world government in which the black, brown and yellow races rule us as their slaves.
You suffer from the effects of all these things that are what you are complaining about. You suffer from their crimes, you are cheated by their greed, you are losing your freedom to choose the companions among whom you will live and raise your children.
You have lost your economic freedom and are fast losing your political freedom. You ask why does Yahweh permit all this evil? He permits it because you permit it. Don't wait for Yahweh to come down from heaven and put the lid on the garbage can, this is your job. It is also your job to put an end to evil by putting an end to the evil people among us. The mystery is why have we waited so long to do it?