Y The Two Seedlines Y
In the oldest writing in Scripture, we learn from the book of Job, "And the Lord said to Satan, From where do you come? Then Satan answered the Lord and said, From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it." (Job 1:7)
Satan was forced out of heaven and henceforth lives on the earth. Peter confirms this in the New Testament: "Your adversary, the devil, prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour." (1 Peter 5:8)
There are some who say the angels nor Satan could procreate. But where is this stated in the Scripture? The only reference that is made about those in heaven is where it is related that men and women are not given in marriage: Matthew 22:29‑30: “Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” (KJV)
Mark 12:25: “For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.” (KJV)
Luke 20:34‑35: “And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage.” (KJV)
There is not one word in any of these verses which say that they could not procreate if they wanted to. Only that they are not given in marriage, nor do they marry. Therefore, it is safe to assume that they could have children or procreate if they wanted; but apparently the desire to have sex will have been taken from them. Therefore, those who base their belief that an angel or a spirit or whatever could not procreate is false; and not proven in the scriptures.
“When man fell by evil angels, with beautiful propriety it was ordered that other angels, holy and unfallen, should minister for God in His reparation of the evil caused to man by their fallen fellow spirits. They rescued at Jehovah's command righteous Lot from doomed Sodom, Jacob from his murderous brother (Genesis 19; 32) ...” (from Fausset's Bible Dictionary)
We can see from these few Bible Commentaries and Bible Dictionaries that the angels can have human bodies and can come in unto the women and subvert them, or beguile them as one of them did Eve.
Other Scriptures in both the Old and the New Testaments tell further of Satan's activities, his authority and powers, and his final destruction. For our purpose, the Scriptures used here suffice to establish the advent of Satan on earth somewhere before Genesis 3:1. Even though it was not reported here, other scripture references give ample evidence that the event most assuredly took place.
This is a prime principle which we must acknowledge and accept, that the whole of Scripture testifies to all parts of Scripture. This principle is clearly evident in the case of Satan's advent; it is evident and necessary in other cases which we shall soon see. Many simply do not have a complete knowledge of this subject, but will find themselves eventually, on one side of the fence or the other. If one tries to straddle the fence on this subject, he will only find himself with his pants torn, and espoused in the most unseemly location.
Like all controversies, there is usually a right and a wrong side to consider. And of course the Jews are throwing in their provocateurs to cause continued friction between the two sides, to the point that neither side will relent even a little in their core beliefs. In this study we will be considering who is wrong on this GREATEST OF ALL ISSUES, at least some believe that it is the greatest of all issues. The concept of the Two Seedlines is; that Satan once ruled to a high degree in the dimensions of Yahweh. In ages past, not being satisfied with his high position, he tried to usurp the position of Yahweh Himself. Satan (the shining one): "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." (2 Corinthians 11:14) convinced 1/3 of Yahweh's angels to join him in his rebellion.
This rebellion is recorded in Revelation 12:7‑9: "And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was THEIR PLACE found any more in heaven. And THE GREAT DRAGON was cast out, THAT OLD SERPENT, CALLED THE DEVIL, AND SATAN, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
If you will notice very carefully, if you have a KJV with a good center reference (cf. Older World, Southwestern or newer Zondervan Classic) this verse takes you to Genesis 3:1, 4 (2 Corinthians; 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6; Revelation 12:9), so there is no doubt here who the serpent of Genesis is. If you don't understand this connection with the above quoted passage and the SERPENT of Genesis 3:1, 4, you will have totally lost sight of the entire story. Yeashua the Messiah, being Yahweh incarnate, speak is of this, Satan's fall, in Luke 10:18:
"... I ‘beheld’ Satan as lightning fall from heaven." This is past tense; not something in the future.
Beheld: Strong’s Concordance: #2334 theoreo (theh‑o‑reh'‑o); from a derivative of 2300 (perhaps by add. of 3708); to be a spectator of, i.e. discern, (literally, figuratively [experience] or intensively [acknowledge]): KJV‑‑ behold, consider, look on, perceive, see. Compare 3700.
Lightning: Strong’s Concordance: #796 astrape (as‑trap‑ay'); from 797; lightning; by analogy, glare: KJV– lightning, bright shining.
Fall: Strong’s Concordance: #4098 pipto (pip'‑to); a reduplicated and contracted form of peto (pet'‑o); (which occurs only as an alternate in certain tenses); probably akin to 4072 through the idea of alighting; to fall (literally or figuratively): KJV‑‑ fail, fall (down), light on.
Christ said: "Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him. Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes. Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out." (John 12:28‑31; Luke 10:18; John 14:30; 16:11; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Ephesians 6:12) (KJV)
The concept of the Two Seedlines further predicates that when Satan fell, with the rest of his satanic beings, they left the dimension of spirit and entered the dimension of the physical, as men: "And THE ANGELS WHICH KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE, but left their own habitation (or principal it, KJV center reference), he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day (no longer having access to Yahweh's dimension)." (Jude 1:6)
We know these fallen angels were living at the time of Yeashua as men, as the center reference of the KJV takes us to John 8:44 where Yeashua said to the "Jews":
"YE ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." (John 8:44; see also (Matthew 3:7; 11:12; 12:39; 12:45; 23:15; Luke 9:41; 10:25; Acts 1:6; 2:40; 13:6‑10; Romans 2:14; 4:15; 7:7; 1 John 3:4; 3:10)
Another cross reference on Jude 6 is 2 Peter 2:4: "For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains (earth bound) of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment."
The fallen angels had the power to change themselves into the form of men is recorded in "The Lost Books of The Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden."
In "Testament of Reuben," 2:18‑19, page 223: "For this they (the women) allured the Watchers (fallen angels) who were before the flood; for as these continually behold them, they lusted after them, and they conceived the act in their mind; FOR THEY CHANGED THEMSELVES INTO THE SHAPE OF MEN, and appeared to them when they were (possibly not) with their husbands. And the women lusting in their minds after their forms, gave birth to giants, for the Watchers appeared to them as reaching even unto heaven."
With this exceptionally outstanding passage, we can more wholly comprehend what it means in Jude 6, the fallen "angels which kept not their first estate." This passage also serves as a paradigm or model, after the fact, of what happened previously involving the satanic seduction of Eve in the garden of Eden. We are now more aware of the war which resulted in the fallen angels becoming earth bound or "chained,," which is an essential element in the concept of the Two Seedline doctrine.
Now that we know who the players are, let's proceed with the narrative which resulted in the two seeds of Genesis 3:15 It is simply amazing the various unreasonable, preposterous, nonsensical and twisted arguments that opponents of the Two Seedline teaching advance to secure their groundless, unfounded and insecure positions. We will be getting to examples of some of them shortly, after we briefly walk carefully, step by step, through the fundamental story.
In Genesis 2:16‑17 we see where Yahweh instructs Adam before the creation of Eve. You see, there was already a danger that Adam might mess up by eating of the forbidden fruit, the mixing with the other races which had been created before Adam was FORMED, even before Eve arrived on the scene.
"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16‑17)
The rest of Chapter 2 concerns itself with the creation of Eve, an "help meet" for Adam who was genetically the same as he was, or as Genesis 2:23 expresses it: "And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." (Genesis 2:23)
You will notice a good cross reference system of the KJV (as stated before) gives Ephesians 5:30 on this verse and says: "For we are members of his (Yeashua's) body, of his flesh and of his bones (same race)."
To further establish the setting or background surroundings of this story, it will be needful to consider Genesis 2:8‑9: "And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil (three kinds of trees in all)."
We have to look for something here that has the knowledge of good and evil. This knowing good and evil is the EARMARK of angels. Therefore, this tree that has the knowledge of good and evil must be an angel of some rank.
If Revelation 12:9 is true, he is the original organizer of the rebellion in heaven, the old serpent himself. For proof that angels have the knowledge of good and evil, let's look at 2 Samuel 14:17: "Then thine handmaid said, The word of my lord the king shall now be comfortable: for AS AN ANGEL OF GOD, SO IS MY LORD THE KING TO DISCERN GOOD AND BAD: therefore the LORD thy God will be with thee."
"And now your servant says, 'May the word of my lord the king bring me rest, for my lord THE KING IS LIKE AN ANGEL OF GOD IN DISCERNING GOOD AND EVIL. May the LORD your God be with you.'" (NIV)
We also would direct your attention to the following verses: "To fetch about this form of speech hath thy servant Joab done this thing: and my lord is wise, ACCORDING TO THE WISDOM OF AN ANGEL OF GOD, TO KNOW ALL THINGS THAT ARE IN THE EARTH." (2 Samuel 14:20)
"And he hath slandered thy servant unto my lord the king; but my lord the king IS AS AN ANGEL OF GOD: do therefore what is good in thine eyes." (2 Samuel 19:27) (JV)
Now that we understand that THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD and EVIL and THE SERPENT are the same thing, we are in a better position to understand who the players in this episode are.
Now let's see what Genesis 3:1‑3 says: "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." (KJV)
"Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" And the woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, lest you die.'" (NAS)
"Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden? The woman said to the serpent, We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die." (NIV)
The KJV center reference says, you will find the SERPENT of Genesis 3:1 is the same SERPENT of Revelation 12:9 that organized the rebellion against Yahweh.
If you will notice again, it also indicates the SERPENT of Genesis 3:1 is the same SERPENT of 2 Corinthians 11:3 which reads: "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ (Yeashua)." (KJV)
Right away the opponents of Two Seedline doctrine are going to moan and groan, and say something like this, this passage is speaking of mental seduction only. Let's see if this supposition is true. Remember, this was the warning!: "But of the fruit off the tree which is in the midst of the garden Yahweh hath said, Ye shall NOT EAT OF IT, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT, lest ye die."
What was it that Eve did EAT?, and What did Eve TOUCH?
The word "eat" in the Hebrew is, #398, akal, to eat; also, to lay with.
Eat: Strong's Concordance #398 'akal (aw‑kal'); a primitive root; to eat (literally or figuratively): KJV‑‑ X at all, burn up, consume, devour (‑er, up), dine, EAT (‑er, up), feed (with), food, X freely, X in ... wise (‑deed, plenty), (LAY) meat, X quite.
To prove that many times this is so, we will use some examples from Scripture. First we will use a supporting Scripture, Proverbs 30:20: "Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she EATETH, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness."
"And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did EAT, and bowed down to their gods." (Numbers 25:2)
With this last verse of Numbers 25:2, the Wycliffe Bible Commentary has this to say on page 145: "They called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods. The subject THEY is feminine, referring to the daughters of Moab with whom the men of Israel committed fornication. Balak, with Balaam's advice."
We also have the testimony of Numbers 5:11‑13: "And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him, AND A MAN LIE WITH HER CARNALLY, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, AND SHE BE DEFILED..." (KJV)
Proverbs 19:28: "An ungodly witness scorneth judgment: and the mouth of the wicked devoureth iniquity." (KJV)
Proverbs 9:17: "Stolen waters are sweet, and bread (EATEN) in secret is pleasant."
One can clearly see, the word "EAT" (#398, akal) in Hebrew, in each of the above verses means sexual intercourse, which it also means in Genesis 3:3 where Eve is confronted by Satan. The scriptural passage we are scrutinizing is: "Ye shall not EAT of it, neither shall ye TOUCH it, lest ye die. Not only does the word EAT sometimes have sexual connotations, but also the word TOUCH which is, #5060 nega, to touch; also to have sexual intercourse.
Touch: Strong's Concordance #5060 Nega` (naw‑gah'); a primitive root; properly, TO TOUCH, i.e. lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphem., TO LIE WITH A WOMAN); by implication, to reach (figuratively, to arrive, acquire); violently, to strike (punish, defeat, destroy, etc.): KJV‑‑ beat, (X be able to) bring (down), cast, come (nigh), draw near (nigh), get up, happen, JOIN, near, plague, reach (up), smite, strike, touch.
Now we will use the following Scriptures to prove and support this. In Genesis 26:10‑11 we find: "And Abimelech said, What is this thou hast done unto us? ONE OF THE PEOPLE MIGHT LIGHTLY HAVE LIEN (lain) WITH THY WIFE, and thou shouldest have brought guiltiness upon us. And Abimelech charged all his people, saying, He that TOUCHETH this man or his wife shall surely be put to death."
Genesis 20:6: "And Yahweh Almighty said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst. this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to TOUCH her."
Genesis 26:28‑29: "...Let there be now an oath betwixt us, even betwixt us and thee, and let us make a covenant with thee; That thou do us no hurt, as we have not TOUCHED thee (Rebekah), and as we have done unto thee nothing but good, and have sent thee away in peace..."
Proverbs 6:29: "So he that goeth in to his neighbour's wife; whosoever TOUCHETH her shall not be innocent."
Notice the word TOUCH of Genesis 3:3 is the same #5060 as the word TOUCH, TOUCHED or TOUCHETH in these reference verses just quoted.
Therefore, both the words EAT and TOUCH have sexual connotations, regardless of what the opponents of Two Seedline doctrine are touting. WITH THESE REFERENCES, WE CAN BE SAFE IN CONCLUDING THAT EVE HAD A SEXUAL ENCOUNTER WITH THE SERPENT (An angel, or someone of another race) IN THE GARDEN. Even though the opponents of the Two Seedline doctrine disagree it will not change Scriptural facts. Genesis 3:13 says: "...And the woman said, the serpent BEGUILED me, and I did EAT."
IT IS ABSURD TO SUGGEST EVE WAS BEGUILED TO EAT ORDINARY FOOD when Yahweh had already approved of eating from garden‑variety fruit trees in Genesis 1:29.
The opponents of the Two Seedline doctrine are always swift to counter with the argument, if Adam and Eve could eat of all the other trees of the garden, that would mean they could have sexual relations with anyone whom they desired.
If trees represents humans in one place, it would have to represent humans in all other places, and this would be highly immoral. This is entirely a false assumption because sometimes the Hebrew is speaking of actual wooden trees, and at other times is speaking of idiomatic trees.
Let's use the Wilson's Old Testament Word Studies, by William Wilson (a Hebrew reference book), page 453 under the heading "TREE."
1). Strong, stout, mighty trees.
2). A tamarisk (flowering), munica, tamarix, Linn. Then perhaps any large tree, and collectively trees, a wood a grove.
3). A tree; often collective trees; green trees the righteous, dry trees the wicked, Ezekiel 20:47; 17:24, all the trees of the field, all men, the high tree, lofty and powerful, the low tree, the weak and contemptible.
4). Pl. shady trees.
For more information on "men as trees walking"; see Mark 8:24. All this demonstrates, if one wants to make a bona fide argument, one should know what one is talking about if this passage meant Adam and Eve could have sexual relations with anyone in the garden, it would have said, "all the (proverbial) beasts or trees of the field."
If one cannot separate the literal language from the idiomatic language of the Scriptures, one simply cannot understand the Bible. In such a case, it might be prudent not to have an opinion.
George M. Lamsa (an expert on Bible idioms), in his Idioms In The bible Explained," says on the following:
Garden: Genesis 2:8; Metaphorically, a wife; a family.
Tree of life in the midst of the garden. Genesis 2:9; Sex; posterity, progeny.
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil: Genesis 2:9; Moral laws; the knowledge of good and evil.
The tree of life: Genesis 2:9; Eternal life.
The tree of good and evil. Genesis 2:17; Metaphorically, sexual relationship.
We are now approaching one of the most misunderstood single passages of Scripture in the entire Bible. If we approach it too hurriedly, we will skip over it so quickly, we will never grasp its correct meaning.
There was a time when we were persuaded Genesis 3:15 was a mistranslation, but with more research, we found it to be highly accurate. We will present several different interpretations of Genesis 3:15 from several various translations:
"And I will put enmity BETWEEN THEE and THE WOMAN, and BETWEEN THY SEED and HER SEED; IT shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." (KJV)
"And I WILL PUT ENMITY BETWEEN THEE and THE WOMAN, and BETWEEN THY SEED and HER SEED: HE shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." (ASV)
"And I WILL PUT ENMITY BETWEEN YOU and THE WOMAN, and BETWEEN YOUR SEED and HER SEED; HE shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel." (NAS)
"And I WILL PUT ENMITY BETWEEN YOU and THE WOMAN, and BETWEEN YOUR SEED and HER SEED; HE shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel." (NAU)
"And I WILL PUT ENMITY BETWEEN YOU and THE WOMAN, and BETWEEN YOUR OFFSPRING and HERS; He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." (NIV)
"FROM NOW ON YOU and THE WOMAN WILL BE ENEMIES, AS WILL YOUR OFFSPRING and HERS. You will strike his heel, but he will crush your head." (TLB)
"And I WILL SET A FEUD BETWEEN YOU and THE WOMAN, BETWEEN YOUR BROOD AND HERS; THEY shall strike at your head, and you shall strike at THEIR heel." (James Moffett, Harper & Brothers Publishers, New York and London)
If there were not two separate seed lines and that it was not a sexual act that Eve committed; then the following verses would have no meaning and would not have been placed in the Scriptures, for without a sexual act, the information is useless and means nothing.
"UNTO THE WOMAN HE SAID, I WILL GREATLY MULTIPLY THY SORROW AND THY CONCEPTION..." (Genesis 3:16) (KJV)
Conception: Strong's Concordance #2032 herown (hay‑rone'); or herayown (hay‑raw‑yone'); from 2029; PREGNANCY: KJV‑‑ conception.
Conception: Brown‑Driver‑Briggs' Definition #2032 herown or herayown‑PHYSICAL CONCEPTION, PREGNANCY, conception.
Now let's follow the proper sequence of events. Its all a matter of putting events in their proper order.
* General renovating of the earth.
"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and REPLENISH the earth..." (Genesis 1:28) (KJV)
* War in the Heavens.
"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels." (Revelation 12:7) (KJV)
* Satan and 1/3 of angels cast and bound to earth.
"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And THE GREAT DRAGON WAS CAST OUT, THAT OLD SERPENT, CALLED THE DEVIL, AND SATAN, WHICH DECEIVETH THE WHOLE WORLD: HE WAS CAST OUT INTO THE EARTH, and HIS ANGELS WERE CAST OUT WITH HIM." (Revelation 12:7‑9) (KJV)
* Adam and Eve formed in the image of Yahweh.
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground..." (Genesis 2:7) (KJV)
* Satan seduced Eve and caused a 1st PREGNANCY.
"...SHE CONCEIVED, and BARE CAIN, and said, I HAVE GOTTEN A MAN FROM THE LORD (She did not say she had gotten a man from Adam, but from what she thought was a lord, as he had deceived her). And SHE AGAIN BARE HIS BROTHER ABEL (Obviously Cain and Abel were twin brothers and were born a few minutes apart as twins do. But Abel was the son of Adam, which sometimes happens when a woman has sex with two different men, she gets pregnant by them both. This has been proven to be true; although it does not happen very often, it does happen). And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground." (Genesis 4:1‑2) (KJV)
* Cain murders Abel.
"And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him." Genesis 4:8) (KJV)
* Adam knew Eve for his second time.
"And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew." (Genesis 4:25) (KJV)
Seth is born as a SUBSTITUTE for Abel. (Genesis 4:25)
Once these events are placed in their proper order, all confusion with Genesis 4:1 disappears. Once we learn that Adam's knowing Eve had nothing to do with the birth of Cain, all become crystal‑clear. In most cases, the logical conclusion that Cain was the son of Adam would be a proper one, but not with this verse. The CONCEIVING in this verse had absolutely nothing to do with the BEARING. Now let's read this verse in a new light, but of an old truth:
"And Adam knew Eve his wife...and (she next) bare Cain, and said, I have gotten my first (male child), a man to present to Yahweh as first born. And she again bare his (½) brother Abel.
We have changed the words a little to make the meaning eminently more evident and truth worthy. Once the true order of events of this verse is understood, it opens up a whole new understanding of what is happening in the world today.
There is very substantial evidence that the "Jews" of today are descended from Cain. We have no less than the words of Yeashua the Messiah Himself concerning this.
Once it is understood the "Jews" are devils walking around in shoe leather, we can begin to see the guiding hand of the great world conspiracy and all the monstrous problems we are faced with today.
Without an understanding of the Two Seedlines, we are at a detrimental loss to know who the enemy is. The knowledge, or the lack of it, is the difference between the brightest day or the blackest night. Because this verse is not properly understood is one of the reasons that Yahweh states in Hosea: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge..." (Hosea 4:6) (KJV)
"So who benefits from this scriptural corruption, and where might you expect to find this Seedline doctrine taught? One Seedline teacher accurately pointed out that this hypothesis is not of modern origin: ‘The historicity of a sexual interpretation of original sin can be documented from the literature of antiquity and clearly proves beyond any doubt that this belief did not originate with modern man.' (Scott Stinson, "The Serpent and Eve," The Vision (Schell City, MO: The Church of Israel, July 1998, Volume 2 Number 8) p. 28)
"In other words, from Judahites who had been educated in Babylonian traditions. Among others, this seedliner quoted rabbis who quoted the Talmud as "proof" for his Seedline beliefs: ‘...it (the Seedline hypothesis) was a common teaching among the (post‑Babylonian) rabbis of antiquity...In one place, we read: ‘rabbi Johanan stated. When the serpent copulated with Eve, he infused her with lust.' (Yebamoth 103b) Another rabbi states: ‘Thus I have learnt, that when the serpent had intercourse with Eve he injected defilement into her.' (Haye Sarah 126a) Lastly, another replies: ‘You rightly said that when the serpent had carnal intercourse with Eve he injected into her defilement." (Haye Sarah 126b) (Scott Stinson, "The Serpent and Eve," The Vision (Schell City, MO: The Church of Israel, July 1998, Volume 2 Number 8) p. 28)
This seedliner also quoted several other Babylonian‑influenced works of antiquity: “This (Seedline) interpretation is confirmed in the ancient literature of Israel, especially the commentaries on the Hebrew Bible written in Aramaic and commonly known as Targums. The commentaries were written after the (remnant's, people from the Tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi) return from Babylon...One text gives this interpretation of Genesis 4:1: ‘And Adam knew his wife Eve, who was pregnant by the Angel Sammael, and she conceived and bare Cain; and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like the earthly beings, and she said, I have acquired a man, the angel of the Lord." (Targum of Jonathan to Genesis 4:1)
“Another ancient commentary gives a similar interpretation of the same passage: ‘And Adam knew his wife Eve, who had desired the Angel; and she conceived, and bare Cain; and she said, I have acquired a man, the angel of the Lord..." (Palestinian Targum to Genesis 4:1) In another rabbinic work we find a similar interpretation...And she saw that his likeness was not of earthly beings, but of the heavenly beings, and she prophesied and said: I have gotten a man from the Lord." (Pirke de Rabbi Elieser, 21) One Rabbinic source states: ‘Even bore Cain from the filth of the serpent, and therefore from him were descended all the wicked generations, and from his side is the abode of spirits and demons.' (Ahare Moth 76b) A similar explanation for the evil deeds of Cain's lineage is found elsewhere. We read: ‘For two beings had intercourse with Eve, and she conceived from both and bore two children. Each followed one of the male parents, to this side and one to the other, and similarly their characters. On the side of Cain are all the haunts of the evil species, from which come evil spirit and demons." (Bereshith 36b) (Scott Stinson, "The Serpent and Eve," The Vision (Schell City, MO: The Church of Israel, July 1998, Volume 2 Number 8) p. 28‑29)
Now we know that Christ said that the Jews are liars in John 8:44 but that does to mean that a liar will not sometimes tell the truth. Therefore one of the very first things those opposed to a literal Satan‑spawned physical Seedline do, is point out the fact the information can be found in the Talmud. This is a really sneaky deceptive method used by many, to declare guilt by association. The question must be asked: "Is every single word in the Talmud false?"
This idea is built on the assumption, that if it is found in the Talmud, it is automatically wrong. For anyone who uses this approach, we would challenge them to prove every single word in the Talmud to be false. It simply cannot be done, even though it is a collection of the most evil and blasphemous writings ever put together. Not only is there evidence found in the Talmud substantiating the seduction of Eve, but evidence can be found in “The Lost Books of The bible and The Forgotten books of Eden,” "The Protevangelion" 10:1‑10:
"And when her sixth month was come, Joseph returned form his building houses abroad, which was his trade, and entering into the house, found the Virgin grown big: Then smiting upon his face, he said, With what face ca I look up to the Lord my God? Or, what shall I say concerning this young woman? For I received her a Virgin out of the temple of the Lord my God! And have not preserved her such! Who has thus deceived me? Who has committed this evil in my house, and seducing the Virgin from me, hath defiled her? IS NOT THE HISTORY OF ADAM EXACTLY ACCOMPLISHED IN ME? FOR IN THE VERY INSTANT OF HIS GLORY, THE SERPENT CAME AND FOUND EVE ALONE, AND SEDUCED HER. JUST AFTER THE SAME MANNER IT HAS HAPPENED TO ME. Then Joseph arising from the ground, called her, and said, O thou who hast been so much favoured by God, why hast thou done this. Why hast thou debased thy soul, who wast educated in the Holy of Holies, and received thy food from the hand of angels? But she, with a flood of tears, replied, I am innocent, and have known no man."
Some even go so far as to cite the Spirit and the Flesh as the Two Seeds. This is one of the most ridiculous, misdirected applications of holy writ to come from one pretending to be inspired. It is so nonsensical, we will not affiliate the sacred Name of Yahweh with it. If one believes the two seeds of Genesis 3:15 are such, this is the way the verse should have read: "And the Lord God said to Eve's flesh, Because thou hast done this, thy flesh is cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; and thy flesh shall go upon its belly, and dust shalt thy flesh eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between the flesh of the woman and the spirit of the woman, and between the offspring of her flesh and the offspring of her spirit, and offspring of her spirit shall bruise the head of the offspring of her flesh, and the offspring of her flesh will bruise the heel of the offspring of her spirit.
Among other very important details the opponents of Two Seedline doctrine do not explain is: Why is Cain left totally out of the genealogy of Adam? Genesis, Chapter 5, gives the genealogy of Adam to Shem, Ham and Japheth, and Cain is not mentioned once! WHY? Other genealogies in the Bible go into great detail and never leaves out a son! (Especially a firstborn son) If one reads Genesis 4:1 correctly, as depicted, it is not there either. Why is Cain totally left out?? Cain's descendants are mentioned separately in Genesis 4:17‑24 and it doesn't list Adam as the father of Cain! WHY???
The next place we find Cain in the Scriptures is Genesis 15:19 and we will have to read verses 18 through 21: "In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And the Ammonites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites." (Genesis 15:18‑21) (KJV)
One of these nations among the Canaanites was the KENITES (#7017 Strong's) which were DESCENDANTS OF CAIN. Being that Cain was of the SATANIC SEEDLINE, he would infect his satanic blood AMONG ALL THESE TEN NATIONS. And the "Kenizzites" were Edomites.
In the Peake's Commentary on the bible, page 116 we find this about this mixed group of nations spoken of in Genesis 15:19‑21: "When the Israelites entered Canaan they found there a VERY MIXED population generally designated by the term Amorite or Canaanite."
The Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible, Abridged by Ralph Earle, page 38, says:
"The Kenites. Here are ten nations mentioned, though afterwards reckoned but seven; see Deuteronomy 7:1; Acts 13:19. Probably some of them which existed in Abram's time had been BLENDED with others before the time of Moses, so that seven only out of the ten then remained."
Kenites: "[KEE nights] (metalsmiths)‑‑ the name of a wandering tribe of people who were associated with the Midianites (Judges 1:16) and, later, with the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15:6). The Kenites lived in the desert regions of Sinai, Midian, Edom, Amalek, and the Negev. The Bible first mentions the Kenites as one of the groups that lived in Canaan during the time of Abraham (Genesis 15:19); their territory was to be taken by the Israelites (Numbers 24:21‑22). The Kenites were metal craftsmen who may have traced their ancestry to TUBAL‑CAIN (a descendant of Cain) (Genesis 4:22). (from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary) (Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)
The next mention of the descendants of Cain is found in 1 Chronicles 2:55: "And THE FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. THESE ARE THE KENITES that came of Hemath, the father of the house of RECHAB." (KJV)
The Wycliff Bible Comentary, editors: Charles F. Pfeiffer & Everett F. Harrison has this to say on page 8, and this quote will cover Genesis 3:14‑15: "CURSED (arûr) ART THOU. The Lord singled out the originator and instigator of the temptation for special condemnation and degradation. From that moment he must crawl in the dust and even feed on it. He would slither his way along in disgrace, and hatred would be directed against him from all directions. Man would always regard him as a symbol of the degradation of the one who slandered God (cf. Isaiah 65:25). HE WAS TO REPRESENT NOT MERELY THE SERPENT RACE, BUT THE POWER OF THE EVIL KINGDOM. As long as life continued, men would hate him and seek to destroy him. I WILL PUT ENMITY. The word "êbâ" denotes the blood‑feud that runs deepest in the heart of man (cf. Numbers 35:19‑20; Ezekiel 25:15‑17; 35:5‑6) THOU SHALT BRUISE (shûp). A PROPHECY OF CONTINUING STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE DESCENDANTS OF WOMAN AND OF THE SERPENT TO DESTROY EACH OTHER. The verb shûp is rare (cf. Job 9:17; Psalm 139:11). It is the same in both clauses.
“When translated ‘crush’ it seems appropriate to the reference concerning the had of the serpent, but not quite so accurate in also rendered lie in wait for, aim at or (LXX) watch for. The Vulgate renders it "conteret," "bruise" in the first instance and in this famous passage, CALLED THE PROTEVAGEFIUM, ‘FIRST GOSPEL,’ the announcement of a prolonged struggle, perpetual antagonism, wounds on both sides, and eventual victory for the seed of the woman.
“God's promise that the head of the serpent was to be crushed pointed forward to the coming of Messiah and guaranteed victory. Thus assurance fell upon the ears of God's earliest creatures as a blessed hope of redemption."
The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume 3, page 782: "KENITES: Meaning (metalworkers, smiths). Clan or tribal name of semi‑nomadic peoples of South Palestine and Sinai. The Aramaic and Arabic etymologis of the root ‘gyn’ show that it has to do with metal and metal word (thus the Hebrew word from this root, ‘lance’). This probably indicates that the Kenites were metal workers, especially since Sinai and wadi ‘arabah were rich in high grade cooper ore. W.F. Albright has pointed to the Beni Hassan mural in Egypt (19th century B.C.)
“As an illustration of such a WONDERING GROUP OF SMITHS. This mural depicts thirty‑six men, women and children in characteristic Semitic dress leading along with other animals, donkeys laden with MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, weapons and an item which Albright has identified as a BELLOWS. He has further noted that Lemech's three children (Genesis 4:19‑22) were responsible for HEARDS (Jubal), MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS (Jubal), and METAL WORK (Tubal‑Cain, or Tubal, THE SMITH), the three occupations which seem most evident in the mural...2nd quote from the same article: THE EARLY MONARCHY. During this period a significant concentration of Kenites was located in the southern Judean territory. This is clear from 1 Samuel 15:6 cited above and also from David's relations with them.”
Postexilic references. In 1 Chronicles 2:55 the FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES living at Jabaz are said to be Kenites. Apparently, during the kingdom and exile periods, certain Kenites had given up NOMADIC SMITHING and had taken on a more sedentary, but equally honorable PROFESSION (?) OF SCRIBE.
Peake's Commentary on the Bible, page 114: "The etymology of the name suggest THAT THEY WERE SMITHS OR ARTIFICERS, a theory which is supported by their association with the Wadi ‘Arabah, where there were copper deposits which had been worked by the Egyptians since the middle of the 3rd millennium.
The Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary On The Whole bible has this to say on Kenite, page 293: "THE FAMILIES OF THE SCRIBES; either civil or ecclesiastical officers of the Kenite origin, WHO ARE HERE CLASSIFIED WITH THE TRIBE OF JUDAH, NOT AS BEING DESCENDED FROM IT, but as dwellers within its territory, and in a measure INCORPORATED with its people."
The Matthew Pool's Commentary On The Holy Bible has this to say on the Kenites, Volume 1, page 778: "THE SCRIBES; either civil, WHO WERE PUBLIC NOTARIES, WHO WROTE AND SIGNED LEGAL INSTRUMENTS; OR ECCLESIASTICAL...and are here mentioned not as if they were of the tribe of Judah, but because thy dwelt among them, and probably were allied to them by marriages, and so in a manner incorporated with them. Which dwelt, or rather, dwelt; Hebrew, were dwellers. For the other translation, which dwelt, MAY SEEM TO INSINUATE THAT THESE WERE DESCENDANTS OF JUDAH, WHICH THEY WERE NOT; but his translation ONLY SIGNIFIES COHABITATION WITH THEM, for which cause they are here named with them.
All these things the Jews do today, here in America. And because Christians have listened to the lying, deceiving, traitorous, Priests of Baal, the Judeo-Christian Clergy they have almost destroyed our nation and are fast destroying our people.
Now that we have established a solid foundation in the Holy Writ concerning the Two Seedline doctrine, let's tell the story in a different way. With this narrative, the one important fact revealed in the above passages is: Yeashua our Messiah exposed the "Jews" for what they are many years ago.
You could spend thousands of dollars on books updating the story to our present time, and it is still the same old story as it was two thousand years ago, some people today have the audacity to insinuate that Our Redeemer didn't know what he was talking about. We will start this portion of our study with Genesis 3:14‑15. "And Yahweh said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy (Kenite ‑"Jewish") seed and her (White) seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."
Reread the second paragraph above. The center reference of the KJV then takes us to Revelation 12:9: "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
Next we will go unaided to Matthew 3:7: "But when he (John the Baptist) saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O GENERATION (offspring) OF VIPERS, how can ye, being evil, speak good things for out of the abundance of the heart (genetic intellect) the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things."
From here the KJV center reference takes us to Matthew 13:38: "The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom (Israelites); but the tares (Jews) are the children of the wicked one."
With a reading of Colossians 2:15 we can see how Yahshua put the Satanic/Jew/Seedline to an open shame and stripped them of their authority. “And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.”
Now we will go to Luke 11:49-51 and use this passage rather than Matthew 23:34-36 for there are problems with Matthew’s version. “Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute: That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required (έκζηέ_, to demand an account of) of this generation (#1074, genea); From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation (#1074, genea).”
Here Yahshua is charging the “Jews” with the murder of Abel. It would have been criminally illegal on the part of Yahshua to make such a charge if it were not true. The only way He could legally have produced such a serious charge was if the “Jews” of His day were descended from Cain, for no other person in all of history was responsible for the murder of Abel, but Cain.
Why didn’t Josephus mention the Pharisees and Sadducees as being Jews by birth? We know that in John 8:33 & 37, it appears from the rendering, that the scribes and Pharisees might be true Israelites. Sure, the Arabs can claim Abraham as their father.
We know, also, that the “Jews” of Messiah’s day had absorbed Edomite blood, and therefore could claim both Abraham and Isaac as their fathers. The Shelanite/Judahites could even claim an affinity with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Judah, but that doesn’t make them of the true Tribe of Judah. Recent archaeological finds are showing evidence two of Esau’s wives were, more than likely, of the Cain-Satanic-Seedline. Even Howard B. Rand in his book “Primo-Genesis,” plate 11, at the ends of his book, shows Pharaohs Ramesses I & II of Egypt being descended from the House of Esau through Eliphaz.
As was indicated previous, thee are problems with Matthew 23:34-35, a parallel of Luke 11:49-51, quoted above. In these passages, we are being told that (1) The Almighty would send apostles and prophets (future tense), (2) That there had been scribes and prophets sent in THE PAST, (3) These past scribes and prophets were all the way from, and including, Abel, t Zacharias, and (4) That this race of Cain was in times past, and throughout the future, responsible for their deaths. If you will read these passages very carefully, you will notice Abel was the first righteous prophet. The next thing which should be noticed is the fact that Luke does not mention Zacharias’ father.
From research, it would seem to appear that someone added the words “son of Barachias’ in Matthew 23:35. If this is the case, it has caused a lot of confusion. Quoting from “A Commentary on The Holy Bible,” edited by Rev. J.R. Dummelow M.A., page 701: “Zacharias son of Barachias; Jesus probably said ‘Zachariah,’ as in St. Luke, without mentioning the father’s name, but the evangelist or one of the earliest copyists, who thought it necessary to distinguish among the twenty-nine Zachariah of the Old Testament, and understood the canonical prophet to be meant, added the word ‘son of Barachias.’
“There can be no real doubt that the person meant is Zechariah, son of Jehoiada (see 2 Chronicles 24:20), concerning whom there was a Jewish tradition, that his blood could not be removed by washing, but remained bubbling on the ground where it had been shed. In the Jewish arrangement of the books of the sacred Canon, Chronicles stands last, so that Jesus chose His examples from the first and last books of the Jewish (it should be Hebrew, not “Jewish” Bible) Bible.”
The story told here can be found in many reference books. The account might even have a thread of truth. The problem here is: it doesn’t square with the rest of Scripture. While the story about the Zechariah of 2 Chronicles 24:20 is undoubtedly true, it is probably THE WRONG ZECHARIAH. No doubt, some copyist did insert “son of Barachias,” for it is not found in Luke. The problem is: MOST OF THE RECORDED PROPHETS were after 878 B.C., when this particular Zechariah lived.
In other words, if Yahshua was talking about the prophets between Abel and the Zechariah of 2 Chronicles 24:20, it would exclude most of the major and minor prophets. If you will check the dates n which most of the major and minor prophets lived, you will see what we mean. We are sure the Cain-Satanic-Seedline killed most of Yahweh’s prophets after 878 B.C.
It’s like saying that the WAR started with the killing of Abel and continued to the Zechariah of 2 Chronicles 24:20; then subsided until the time of Yahshua, and then resumed. The WAR has been continuous ever since it started in Genesis 3:15.
Another Zechariah to be cited is the Zechariah mentioned by several commentaries and reference books, who lived about 40 years after the Messiah. This one can be found in Josephus’ Wars 4:5:4. The only one left that really makes any sense is the death of Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, found in “The Protevangelion” of “The Lost Books Of The Bible And The Forgotten Books Of Eden,” 16:9-21, page 36: “But Herod made search after John, and sent servants to Zacharias, when he was (ministering) at the altar, and said unto him, Where hast thou hid thy son? He replied to them, I am a minister of God (Yahweh), and a servant at the altar; how should I know where my son is/ So the servants went back, and told Herod the whole; at which he was incensed, and said, Is not this the son of his like to be king in Israel? He sent therefore again his servants to Zacharias, saying, Tell us the truth, where is thy son, for you know that your life is in my hand. So the servants went and told him all this: But Zacharias replied to them, I am a martyr for God (Yahweh), and if he shed my blood, the Lord (Yahweh) will receive my soul. Besides know that ye shed innocent blood. However Zacharias was murdered in the entrance of the temple and altar, and about the partition; But the children of Israel knew not when he was killed. Then at the hour of salutation the priests went into the temple, but Zacharias did not according to custom meet them and bless them; Yet they still continued waiting for him to salute them; And when they found he did not in a long time come, one of them ventured into the holy place where the altar was, and he saw blood lying upon the ground congealed; when, behold , a voice from heaven said, Zacharias is murdered and his blood shall not be wiped away until THE REVENGE OF HIS BLOOD COME...”
You can clearly see here the description of Zacharias’ death at the hand of Herod fits Luke 11:47-51 and Matthew 23:34-36 quite well. More importantly, it doesn’t leave any huge gaps in history from Abel to this Zacharias. Also, with the future tense, it covers the entire time period from Yahshua up until our present time. There have been no time outs in this WAR. For evidence that it is a genetic race war between the children of darkness and the children of light, we will quote the “Believer’s Bible Commentary,” by William MacDonald on Matthew 23:36, page 1291; also from page 1416 concerning Luke 11:50-51. While MacDonald doesn’t grasp the “Jew” question, he understands it is a matter of “race.”
“The guilt of all the past would come on the generation or RACE to which Christ (Yahshua) was speaking, as if all previous shedding of innocent blood somehow combined and climaxed in the death of the sinless Savior. A torrent of punishment would be poured out on the nation that hated its Messiah without a cause and nailed Him to a criminal’s cross. He would require of that generation the blood of all God’s (Yahweh’s) spokesmen, beginning with the first recorded case in the Old Testament, that of Abel, down to the last instance, that of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the temple...Therefore the Lord Jesus (Yahshua) ran the entire gamut of martyrs when He mentioned Abel and Zechariah. As He uttered these words, He well know that the generation then living would put Him to death on the cross, and thus bring to an awful climax all their previous persecution of men of God (Yahweh).”
It was not at the cross that Messiah imposed revenge for all the prophets from Abel up until His time, but at the siege of Titus at Jerusalem in 70 A.D. For insight on this, we will quote from the “Adam Clarke’s Commentary On The Bible,” abridged by Ralph Earle, pages 816 and 874. Again, these are comments on the passages; Luke 11:47-51 and Matthew 23:34-36: “The Lord (Yahshua) would, after the crucifixion of Christ (Yahshua), visit upon them the murder of all those righteous men, that their state should grow worse and worse, till at the last the Temple should be destroyed, and they (were) finally ruined by the Romans. Required. May be translated either by the word ‘visited’ or ‘revenged,’ and the latter word evidently conveys the meaning of our Lord (Yahshua). They are here represented AS HAVING THE BLOOD AMONG THEM; and it is intimated that God (Yahweh) will come by and by to require it, and to inquire how it was shed, and TO PUNISH THOSE WHO SHED IT.”
If one don’t understand Two Seedline, you can’t grasp the meaning of all that was going on at that particular time. Now a comment from “The Wycliffe Bible Commentary,” concerning Matthew 23:34 on page 971: “These persecutions here foretold would fill up the measure of the Jew’s guilt, so that divine destruction would come upon that generation (descendants of Cain) of the nation.”
The “Matthew Henry’s Commentary,” on Luke 11:49-51 found in volume 5, page 704: “That they must expect no other than to be reckoned with, as the fillers up of the measure of persecution, v. 50, 51. They keep up the trade as it were in succession, and therefore are responsible for the debts of the company, even those it has been contracting all along from the blood of Abel, when the world began, to that of Zacharias, and so forward to the end of the Jewish state; it shall all be required of this generation (race), this last generation of the Jews, whose sin in persecuting Christ’s apostles would exceed any of the sins of that kind that their fathers were guilty of, and so would bring wrath upon them to the uttermost, 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16.
“Their destruction by the Romans was so terrible that it might well be reckoned the completing of God’s (Yahweh’s) vengeance upon that persecuting nations...They are reproved for opposing the gospel of Christ (Yahshua), and doing all they could to obstruct the progress and success of it, v. 52...They had not, according to the duty of their place, faithfully expounded to the people those scriptures of the Old Testament which pointed at the Messiah, which if they had been led into the right understanding by the lawyers, they would readily have embraced him and his doctrine: but instead of that, they had perverted those texts, and had cast a mist before the eyes of the people, by their corrupt glosses upon them, and this is called taking away the key of knowledge; instead of using that key for the people, and helping them to use it aright, they hid it from them; this is called, in Matthew, shutting up the kingdom of heaven against men.” (Matthew 23:13)
From “Matthew Poole’s Commentary On The Holy Bible,” we get this on Luke 11:51, volume 3, page 232: “The Pharisees, like a company of wretched hypocrites, under a pretense of their honoring the memories of the prophets under the Old Testament, took great care to repair and to adorn their sepulchers, while in the mean time their harts were as full of malice against the truth, and against Christ (Yahshua), and those who came to reveal God’s (Yahweh’s) will to them, as ever were their fathers against the prophets; and, saith our Savior, I who am the Wisdom of God, tell you, that I shall send you apostles and prophets, and some of them you shall kill, others you shall persecute; that all the righteous blood that hath been shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zacharias, may come on you...”
You will notice there is some question as to who the correct Zacharias of Luke 11:51 and Matthew 23:35 is, but there is absolutely no question from these references just quoted as to who was Abel’s killer.
As The Serpent Beguiled Eve
The next passage we are going to consider is 2 Corinthians 11:2-3: “...for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Yahshua. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Yahshua.”
It would appear that before Eve was seduced by Satan, she was a “chaste virgin” according to this passage. Was Eve then a chaste virgin physically?, or a chaste virgin mentally? It should be obvious that Paul is telling the Corinthians that he desired their minds not to be violated as Eve was physically violated. Why even use the tem “chaste virgin” if Eve was not violated physically? Notice that Paul tells these Corinthians he had espoused them to one husband. He is saying that he would rather not have them to become espoused to an additional husband as Eve was. In other words, “I have espoused you to one husband”...not as “Eve.” Paul was simply implying that Eve, after her encounter with Satan, was no longer a chaste virgin.
The Greek Proves Eve
Was Beguiled Mentally & Physically
The anti-Seedliners simply haven’t done their homework on the Greek in this passage. If it were speaking of being mentally “beguiled” by words, it would have used the word #538, apatao, meaning to deceive, bring, seduce or mislead into error. Or, if Paul would have meant mental seduction, he probably would have used #5422 or #5423 as in Galatians 6:3 & Titus 1:10. Instead of the word #1818, exapatao, is used. W.E. Vine in his “An Expository Dictionary Of New Testament Word,” page 112, explains it like this: “Exapatao is a STRENGTHENED form of apatao...is rendered ‘beguile,’ 2 Corinthians 11:3; the more adequate rendering would be ‘as the serpent thoroughly beguiled Eve.’ So in 1 Timothy 2:14, in the best miss., this STRONGER form is used of Satan’s deception of Eve, literally thoroughly beguiled; the SIMPLER verb apatao, is used of Adam.”
If a mental seduction were meant, the word #538 apatao, would have been used. W.E. Vine repeats his explanation of the use of the Greek words APATAO and EXAPATAO on pages 278 & 279 under the word “deceive.” Under the heading “verbs,” on the word apatao he says this: “...of those who deceive ‘with empty words,’ belittling the true character of the sins mentioned, Ephesians 5:6...of the fact that Adam was ‘not beguiled,’ 1 Timothy 2:14, R.V. (Cp. What is said of Eve; se exapatao below...”
Then Vine continues: “EXAPATAO...INTENSIVE...signifies to BEGUILE THOROUGHLY, to DECEIVE WHOLLY...”
Thayer in his “Greek Lexicon” and Dr. Spiros Zodhiates in his “Word Study Dictionary N.T.” agree with W.E. Vine.
So Adam knew Eve his wife, but there is no proof that she got pregnant from that union. A man can have intercourse with his wife many times and not get her pregnant; or he can have it one time and she becomes pregnant. Also in both verses she thought she had gotten a man child from the “Lord.” She did not say that she got it from Adam, but she got it from the “Lord.” Because she thought that Satan was a “lord” when he was talking to her and beguiled her.
Genesis 3:16 has many children coming from Satan, not just Cain. In fact, there are many sons and daughters of Satan, but they are not called that.
We find the first mention of them in: “Certain men, THE CHILDREN OF BALL, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known.” (Deuteronomy 13:13)
Now who is this Ball you ask? Well lets look at a couple of Bible commentaries and see what they have to say.
Ball: [BEE Lil uh] (worthlessness); AN OLD TESTAMENT TERM DESIGNATING A PERSON AS GODLESS OR LAWLESS. The KJV translates corrupt (1 Samuel 2:12), perverted (Judges 19:22), rebel (2 Samuel 20:1), scoundrel (1 Kings 21:10,13), worthless men (1 Samuel 30:22), and worthless rogues (2 Samuel 16:7). A "daughter of Ball" (1 Samuel 1:16), (KJV) means a wicked woman (KJV, NIV), one who is base (RSV) and worthless (NAB).
BALL SOMETIMES TAKES THE FORM OF A PROPER NAME (or a personification), APPLIED TO A DEMON OR TO SATAN (Nah. 1:15). MANY SCHOLARS BELIEVE THAT BALL IS ANOTHER NAME FOR SATAN. (from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary) (Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)
Ball: BALL (belli‑al; "worthlessness, wickedness"). Ball is often used in the KJV as if it were a proper name, but beyond question it should not be regarded in the O.T. as such, its meaning being "worthlessness," and hence "recklessness, lawlessness." The expression "son" or "man of Ball" must be understood as meaning simply a worthless, lawless fellow (Deuteronomy 13:13; Judg. 19:22; 20:13), see marg.; etc.)
In the NT the term appears (in the best manuscripts) in the form Belies, and not Ball, as given in the KJV. THE TERM, AS USED IN (2 Corinthians 6:15), IS GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD AS APPLIED TO SATAN, AS THE PERSONIFICATION OF ALL THAT IS BAD.
Ball occurs only once in the NAB and NIV (2 Corinthians 6:15). Elsewhere in those translations the Hebrew terms rendered "sons [or children] of Ball" in the KJV are given as "worthless men," "worthless fellows," or "wicked men," often with a marginal reading, "lit., sons of Ball." (from New Under's Bible Dictionary) (originally published by Moody Press of Chicago, Illinois. Copyright (C) 1988.)
Ball: (worthlessness): recklessness, lawlessness. Not strictly a proper name, but used so by personification. [Beni] = "without" and [ya'al] "usefulness," i.e. good for nothing. "A man of Ball" is a worthless, lawless fellow (Deuteronomy 13:13; Judges 19:22; 1 Samuel 2:12). Later [Raqa'] ("vain fellows" (2 Samuel 6:20), [hareeqiym]), and "Fool" were used instead: (Matthew 5:22). [Nabal] (= fool) is called "man of Ball" (1 Samuel 25:25) In the New Testament "Beliar" is the form in some oldest manuscripts (2 Corinthians 6:15) AS SATAN IS OPPOSED TO GOD, ANTICHRIST TO CHRIST, SO BALL STANDING HERE IN CONTRAST TO CHRIST MUST DENOTE ALL ANTI-CHRISTIAN POLLUTIONS PERSONIFIED. (from Fausset's Bible Dictionary)
When reading on in the scriptures after Deuteronomy 13:13, we see that Yahweh orders the children of Ball destroyed, every man, woman and child and all their goods: “Then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; THOU SHALT SURELY SMITE THE INHABITANTS (Yahweh is saying here all of the inhabitants of the city, the men, women and children they are so evil) OF THAT CITY WITH THE EDGE OF THE SWORD, DESTROYING IT UTTERLY, AND ALL THAT IS THEREIN, AND THE CATTLE THEREOF, WITH THE EDGE OF THE SWORD. And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again. And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing to thine hand: that the LORD may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and shew thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers; When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD thy God.” (Deuteronomy 13:14‑18)
The men and women of Ball were and are queers as the following verse attests: “Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Ball, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, BRING FORTH THE MAN THAT CAME INTO THINE HOUSE, THAT WE MAY KNOW HIM.” (Judges 19:22)
The man of the house asked the queers to go away and leave him and the man alone and that they should not do such evil.
“And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly. Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house (she died from the abuse) where her lord was, till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and got him unto his place. And WHEN HE WAS COME INTO HIS HOUSE, HE TOOK A KNIFE, AND LAID HOLD ON HIS CONCUBINE, AND DIVIDED HER, TOGETHER WITH HER BONES, INTO TWELVE PIECES, AND SENT HER INTO ALL THE COASTS OF ISRAEL.” (Judges 19:23‑29)
When he sent the pieces of the woman to the twelve tribes, one can just imagine what consternation it caused them. It caused such a furor that they had a meeting of all the tribes to see what they would do, to these evil men.
“And it was so, that all that saw it said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day: consider of it, take advice, and speak your minds.” (Judges 19:30)
So the Tribes of Israel had their meeting and it was decided that they would destroy the evil men that did this awful deed. They told Benjamin in the city to:
“Now therefore deliver us the men, the children of Ball, which are in Gibeah, that we may put them to death, and put away evil from Israel. But the children of Benjamin would not hearken to the voice of their brethren the children of Israel.” (Judges 20:13)
But the Benjamites would not deliver the evil sons of Ball to the other Israelites. And because of them not giving up the evil ones, the sons of Satan, the Jews who were called “Ball” all but a few of the tribe of Benjamin were destroyed.
“Now therefore deliver us the men, the children of Ball, which are in Gibeah, that we may put them to death, and put away evil from Israel. But the children of Benjamin would not hearken to the voice of their brethren the children of Israel.” (Judges 20:13)
Then because they would not hearken unto their brothers: “And the children of Benjamin said, They are smitten down before us, as at the first. But the children of Israel said, Let us flee, and draw them from the city unto the highways. And all the men of Israel rose up out of their place, and put themselves in array at Baaltamar: and the liers in wait of Israel came forth out of their places, even out of the meadows of Gibeah. And there came against Gibeah ten thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and the battle was sore: but they knew not that evil was near them. And the LORD smote Benjamin before Israel: and the children of Israel destroyed of the Benjamites that day twenty and five thousand and an hundred men: all these drew the sword. So the children of Benjamin saw that they were smitten: for the men of Israel gave place to the Benjamites, because they trusted unto the liers in wait which they had set beside Gibeah. And the liers in wait hasted, and rushed upon Gibeah; and the liers in wait drew themselves along, and smote all the city with the edge of the sword. Now there was an appointed sign between the men of Israel and the liers in wait, that they should make a great flame with smoke rise up out of the city. And when the men of Israel retired in the battle, Benjamin began to smite and kill of the men of Israel about thirty persons: for they said, Surely they are smitten down before us, as in the first battle. But when the flame began to arise up out of the city with a pillar of smoke, the Benjamites looked behind them, and, behold, the flame of the city ascended up to heaven. And when the men of Israel turned again, the men of Benjamin were amazed: for they saw that evil was come upon them. Therefore they turned their backs before the men of Israel unto the way of the wilderness; but the battle overtook them; and them which came out of the cities they destroyed in the midst of them. Thus they inclosed the Benjamites round about, and chased them, and trode them down with ease over against Gibeah toward the sunrising. And there fell of Benjamin eighteen thousand men; all these were men of valour. And they turned and fled toward the wilderness unto the rock of Rimmon: and they gleaned of them in the highways five thousand men; and pursued hard after them unto Gidom, and slew two thousand men of them. So that all which fell that day of Benjamin were twenty and five thousand men that drew the sword; all these were men of valour. But six hundred men turned and fled to the wilderness unto the rock Rimmon, and abode in the rock Rimmon four months. And the men of Israel turned again upon the children of Benjamin, and smote them with the edge of the sword, as well the men of every city, as the beast, and all that came to hand: also they set on fire all the cities that they came to.” (Judges 20:32‑48)
The children of Israel slew so many of the Tribe of Benjamin that they feared that Benjamin would cease to be a tribe; so they went to Yahweh and asked how they could remedy the situation as they had sworn that they would not give their daughters to Benjamin for wives. And Yahweh told them what to do and they did it, therefore Benjamin remained a tribe in Israel.
The sons or daughters are mentioned also in the following scriptures: 1 Samuel 1:16, 10:27, 25:17, 25:25, 30:22; 2 Samuel 16:7, 20:1, 23:6; 1 Kings 21:10, 21:13; 2 Chronicles 13:7; 2 Corinthians 6:15. And every time they are mentioned they are evil and are to be eventually destroyed.
There is no doubt that these are the children of Satan, just as was Cain. They were the descendants of Cain.
Ball: (be'‑li‑al), (bel'‑yal) (beliya`al; Beliar): This name, occurring very frequently in the Old Testament, has the sense of "worthlessness" (compare (2 Samuel 23:6); accordingly in such phrases as "sons of Ball" (Judges 20:13; 1 Samuel 10:27, etc.), "Men of Ball" (1 Samuel 30:22; 1 Kings 21:13, etc.), which the English Revised Version usually retains, the American Standard Revised Version more correctly renders, "base fellows" (so "daughter of Ball" (1 Samuel 1:16), "wicked woman"). There is here no suggestion a proper name. AFTERWARD, HOWEVER, “BALL” BECAME A PROPER NAME FOR SATAN, OR FOR ANTICHRIST (thus frequently in the Jewish (should be rendered Israelite) Apocalyptic writings, e.g. in XII P, Book Jub, Asc Isa, Sib Or). In this sense Paul used the word in 2 Corinthians 6:15, "What concord hath Christ with Ball?" (Beliar). Bousset thinks that Paul's "man of sin" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, where some authorities read "man of lawlessness," is a translation of this term. The sense at least is similar. See ANTICHRIST; MAN OF SIN. JAMES ORR (from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Electronic Database Copyright (C) 1996 by Biblesoft)
We have this from another commentary on the word Ball: David, "what a mean creature is he!" "Lord, what is man," may we say upon the reading of this story, "what a vile creature is he, when he is given up to his own heart's lusts!" THE SINNERS ARE HERE CALLED SONS OF BALL, THAT IS, UNGOVERNABLE MEN, MEN THAT WOULD ENDURE NO YOKE, CHILDREN OF THE DEVIL (for he is Ball), resembling him, and joining with him in rebellion against God and his government. (from Matthew Henry's Commentary)
So we can see that the Seedliners avoid the passages they can’t explain away, and hang on to those that can be explained and shows that their beliefs are fallacious.
We Are At War
We would remind everyone who is not aware of it, we are in a WAR; not the one in Afghanistan. This WAR has been going on for about 7,000 years. This WAR is between the GENETIC children of Yahweh and the GENETIC children of Satan; this WAR is between the White Children of Adam and Eve and the offspring of Satan through Cain whom we know today as “Jews.” Yes, the “Jews” are the literal progeny of Satan walking about today in shoe-leather. The “Jews” of today and the scribes and Pharisees of Messiah’s time should not be confused with the True Tribe of Judah.
The religion practiced by the Pharisees in Jesus’ time was based exclusively on the Babylonian Talmud. This, according to Rabbi Morris Kertzer, “The Talmud consists of 63 books of legal, ethical and historical writings of the ancient rabbis. It was edited five centuries after the birth of Jesus. It is a compendium of law and lore. IT IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS.”
In his lifetime Michael Rodkinson, the assumed name of a “Jew” who was one of the world’s great authorities on the Talmud, wrote “History of the Talmud.” This classic on the subject was written by Michael Rodkinson in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi Isaac M. Wise.
In his “History of the Talmud” Michael Rodkinson, on page 70, states: “Is the literature that Jesus was familiar with in his early years yet in existence in the world? Is it possible for us to get at it? Can we ourselves review the ideas, the statements, the modes of reasoning and thinking, ON MORAL AND RELIGIOUS SUBJECTS, which were current in his time, and MUST HAVE BEEN EVALUATED BY HIM DURING THOSE THIRTY SILENT YEARS WHEN HE WAS PONDERING HIS FUTURE MISSION? To such inquiries the learned class of Jewish rabbis ANSWER BY HOLDING UP THE TALMUD ... and the question becomes, therefore, an interesting one TO EVERY CHRISTIAN. What is the Talmud? THE TALMUD, THEN, IS THE WRITTEN FORM OF THAT WHICH, IN THE TIME OF JESUS WAS CALLED THE TRADITIONS OF THE ELDERS AND TO WHICH HE MAKES FREQUENT ALLUSIONS.”
Arsene Darmester in the book “The Talmud” states: “Judaism finds its expression in the Talmud, it is not a remote suggestion and a faint echo thereof, but it...has become incarnate, in which it has taken form, passing from a state of abstraction into the domain of real things. The study of Judaism is that of the Talmud, as the study of the Talmud is that of Judaism...they are two inseparable things...they are one and the same...the Talmud, is a complete expression of religious movement, and this code of endless presumptions and minute ceremonials represents in its perfection the total work of the religious idea...The miracle was accomplished by a book, The Talmud...
“The Talmud is composed of two distinct parts the Mishna and the Gemara; the former the text, the latter a commentary upon the text...term Mishna we designate a collection of decisions and traditional laws embracing all departments of legislation, civil and religious...
“This code, the work of several generations of rabbis...nothing can equal the importance of the Talmud unless it be the ignorance that prevails concerning it...This explains how it happens that a single page of the Talmud contains three or four different languages, or rather specimens of one language at three or four stages of degeneracy...many a Mishna of five or six lines is accompanied by fifty or sixty pages of explanation ... is law in all its authority; it constitutes dogma and cult; it is the fundamental element of the Talmud...
“The daily study of the Talmud which among Jews begins with the age of ten to end with life itself necessarily was a severe gymnastic for the mind, thinks to which it acquired incomparable subtlety and acumen...since it aspires to one thing: To establish for Judaism a ‘Corpus Juris Eccleiastict!’”
John Lightfoot understood this when he wrote in his “A Commentary on the New Testament From the Talmud and Hebraica,” volume 3, page 334 in reference to John 8:37: “From this whole period it is manifest that the while tendency of our Savior’s discourse is to SHEW THE JEWS THAT THEY ARE THE SEED OF THAT SERPENT that was to bruise the heel of the Messiah: else what could that mean, ver. 44. ‘Ye are of your father the devil,’ but this, viz. ‘Ye are the seed of the serpent?’”
Let’s now take a look at John 8:38. While we do, let’s remember that in verse 41 the “Jews” were very defensive of the implication of being “born of fornication.” Being born of fornication implies being born of an impure racial union, Greek #4202. Dr. Spiros Zodhiates in his “New Testament Word Study Dictionary,” page 1201: “In John 8:41, ‘We be not born of fornication’ means, ‘We are not spurious children, born of a concubine, but are the true descendants of Abraham.’”
Sure, the Arabs can claim Abraham as their father. We know, also, that the “Jews” of Messiah’s day had absorbed Edomite blood, and therefore could claim both Abraham and Isaac as their fathers. The Shelanite-Judahites could even claim an affinity with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Judah, but that doesn’t make them of the True Tribe of Judah. Now let’s read that passage with that in mind: “They answered and said uno him, Abraham is our father. Yahshua saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.”
Verse 39 really clears up the whole matter. “The Holy Bible New Century Version,” puts it very nicely in verse 39: “They answered, ‘Our father is Abraham.’ Jesus said, ‘If you were really Abraham’s children, you would do the things Abraham did.’”
A “Commentary On The Holy Bible,” edited by Rev. J.R. Dummelow M.A., page 789 remarks on John 8:37 in this manner: “Their desire to kill Christ, the promised seed of Abraham, proved that they were not children of Abraham, but Satan.”
“The Adam Clarke’s commentary on the Bible,” abridged by Ralph Earle, agrees with Dr. Lightfoot on John 8:37 as quoted here above: “My word hath no place in you. Or, ‘this doctrine of Mine has no place in you.’ You hear the truths of God [Yahweh] but you do not heed them; the word of life has no influence over you. And how can it when you seek to kill Me because I proclaim this truth to you? From what is here said it is manifest, says Dr. Lightfoot, that the whole tendency of our Savior’s discourse is to show the Jews that they are THE SEED OF THE SERPENT which was to bruise the heel of the Messiah. Else what could that mean, v. 44: ‘Ye are of your father the devil’ i.e., ‘You are the SEED OF THE SERPENT?’”
Maybe, at this point, it would be well to consider Lightfoot’s history. For this we shall go to his “A Commentary on the Hew Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica,” volume 1, in the introduction, pages iii & iv: “Lightfoot was one of many earnest Christian scholars of his time. Master of St. Catherine Hall, Cambridge, he possessed the classical learning of those days. He was at home in Latin and Greek, and he was a master not only of classical Hebrew, but also of Mishnaic Hebrew and the Aramaic of the Talmud. We are reminded of his elder contemporary Lancelot Andrews, one of the translators of the King James Version of the Bible, who composed prayers for himself in Hebrew!
“Aside from Lightfoot’s scholarly writings and productive teaching, he took part in the Westminster Assembly, which sat from 1643 to 1649. He belonged to the Eurasian party, favoring an established church, and this is reflected in the present work in his letter of thanks to Gilbert, who Lightfoot says is, ‘by divine providence, Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all England.’ Lightfoot lived in troubled times. Born in the last days of Queen Elisabeth, he was a boy when the King James Version was published. He sat in the Westminister Assembly while the Long Parliament beheaded King Charles I, then somehow survived the restoration under Charles II, all the while maintaining a real Christian testimony and making an important scholarly contribution to Scripture study. From his commentary one would hardly guess at the turbulent times in which he lived. One point of interest. In the days of Oliver Cromwell, when Lightfoot was at the height of his powers, the Jews were allowed again in England after 250 years of proscription (prohibition).”
From Lightfoot’s comments on John 8:37, we can clearly see he understood the “Jews” were THE SEED OF THE SERPENT of Genesis 3:15. This is the same position as taken by the teachers of Two Seedline.
“Matthew Henry’s Commentary,” volume 5, page 997: “Now Christ overthrows this plea, and exposes the vanity of it by a plain and cogent argument: ‘Abraham’s children will do the works of Abraham, but you do not do Abraham’s works, therefore you are not Abraham’s children.’ The proposition is plain: If you were Abraham’s children, such children of Abraham as could claim an interest in the covenant made with him and his seed, which would indeed put an honour upon your, then you would do the works of Abraham, for to those only of Abraham’s house who kept the way of the Lord, as Abraham did, would God [Yahweh] perform what he had spoken, Genesis 18:19.”
“The Interpreter’s Bible,” volume 8, page 605: “Nonetheless, Christ’s answer to them is grim indeed. You are not of God. You are of your father the devil, AND HIS NATURE SHOWS ITSELF IN YOU. He was a murderer from the beginning; and you seek to kill me; he has nothing to do with the truth, AND TRUE TO YOUR BLOOD AND ANCESTRY, when and because I tell you the truth, you do not believe it, resent it, fling it from you.”
“Peake’s Commentary on the Bible,” page 855: “The Jews have described themselves as ‘descendants of Abraham;’ this leads to a second point. If they were truly Abraham’s children they would resemble their father; but in seeking to kill an innocent man, whose only crime is to speak the truth, they are unlike Abraham as could be Jesus [Yahshua] is the Son of God, and declares the truth he receives from God; but who can their father be/ The charge is repelled with a sneer; they [the Jews] are the children of God; Jesus )it is implied [by the Jews]) was born of fornication. This slander was current later; probably it was used in anti-Christian propaganda in John’s time, and perhaps earlier. But they [the Jews] are not God’s children; if they were, they would love his Son...No, their father is the devil; that is why they seek to kill, and prefer falsehood to truth...”
Literal Trees, or Figurative Trees?
Maybe we can find what the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” is if we first investigate the meaning of the “tree of life.” In both cases, the word for tree is #6086, meaning LITERALLY a firm wooden tree. In the various Bible commentaries and dictionaries there are a multitude of ideas on what the “tree of life” might be.
It really goes back to Weakley’s definition of a wooden tree. As stated before, the counterpart word in the Greek is #3586, and means literally a wooden tree. In Dr. Spiros Zodhiates’ “New Testament Word Study Dictionary,” he says this on page 1023 concerning #3586, (xulon)
“In Revelation 2:7; 22:2, 14, it is conceivable that the ‘tree of life’ may be an allusion to the cross and could be rendered ‘wood of life’ (a.t.) Sept.: Genesis 1:11-12, 2:9.”
This makes a lot of sense in other words, the wooden tree represents the wooden cross (whatever kind of device it might have been) on which our Messiah wrought Redemption! And how else do we “eat” of “the tree of life” but by the partaking of Communion? Inasmuch as a few Bible scholars understood it this way, let’s now consider some of their comments: “Nelson’s Illustrated Bible dictionary,” page 1072, under the topic “TREE OF LIFE:” “Adam and Eve’s inability to eat from this tree after their sin showed that they failed to gain immortality, or eternal life. Because of their sin, they were subject to death and dying. This condition lasted until the coming of Jesus Christ [Yahshua], the second Adam, who offers eternal life to all [of Adam] who believe in Him.” (1 John 5:11-12) “Matthew Poole’s Commentary On The Holy Bible,” volume 3, page 1008: “...That they may have right to the tree of life; to Christ, called before, the tree of life, [Revelation 22] ver. 2, by virtue of the promise, chap ii. 7, for no works of ours will give us a right of purchase to it. And may enter in through the gates into the city...”
“A Commentary On The Holy Bible,” edited by Rev. J.R. Dummelow M.A., page 10: “...the fruit of His perfect obedience, and have a right to the TREE OF LIFE. ‘As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.’”
To follow up on the theme of the “tree of life,” let’s quote some different passages where it is mentioned:
“For many great miseries shall be done to them (Israel) that in the latter time shall dwell in the world, because they have walked to great pride. But understand thou for thyself, and seek out the glory of such as be like thee. For unto you is paradise opened, THE TREE OF LIFE is planted, the time to come is prepared, plenteousness is made ready, a city is builded, and rest is allowed, yea, perfect goodness and wisdom.” (2 Esdras 8:50-52)
Testament Of Levi as found in “The Lost Books of The Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden:” “And he shall open the gates of paradise, and shall remove the threatening sword against Adam, and he shall give to the saints to eat from the TREE OF LIFE, and the spirit of holiness shall be on them. And Beliar shall be bound by him, and he shall give power to His children to tread upon the evil spirits. And the Lord (Yahweh) shall rejoice in His children, and be well pleased in His beloved ones for ever. Then shall Abraham and Isaac and Jacob exult, and I will be glad, and all the saints shall clothe themselves with joy. And now, my children, ye have heard all; choose, therefore for yourselves either the light or the darkness, either the law of the Lord (Yahweh) or the works of Beliar.” (Testament of Levi 5:26-30)
Once we comprehend that YAHSHUA THE MESSIAH is the TREE OF LIFE, our apprehension is opened up for us and our understanding comes to life. Notice verse 30 speaks of both “light” and “darkness;” the very same forces which are at WAR with each other in our world today. Beliar is another name for Satan. These two trees in Eden were not literal wooden trees, but walking, talking & breathing metaphorically idiomatic trees representing genetic people. The “tree of life” was Yahshua the Messiah and the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” was Beliar or Satan.
Such family trees are described in Mark: “And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto him, and besought him to touch him. And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw aught. And he looked up, and said, I see MEN WAS TREES WALKING.” (Mark 8:22-24)
It seems this former blind man had better eyesight than the anti-seedliners of today. It is simply amazing, as the anti-seedliners of today dance up and down and insist that there is only one seed in Genesis 3:15, and that seed is only one man, Yahshua. It takes TWO to have ENMITY, as enmity means: MUTUAL hatred. Mutual means: give or felt by one another in equal amount.
The word for “enmity” in Genesis 3:15 is the Hebrew word #342, and is found also in Numbers 35:21-22; Ezekiel 25:15; 35:5-6, and in every case, two parties are involved. The only way, therefore, for Genesis 3:15 to be speaking of “one seed” is if the Redeemer were to hate Himself. Can you see now how ridiculous such a premise is, that the anti-seedliners promote? They have really backed themselves into a corner on that one! Then, they rant and rave that there wasn’t anything sexual concerning Eve’s seduction, but that it was all a matter of mental seduction. They insist it is all an invention of the Two seedliners.
That there are others who interpret the seduction of Eve in a sexual manner, let’s refer to “The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible,” volume R-Z, page 696. While this publication does not take a stand on the subject one way or the other, at least it points out that this is one of the interpretations; “Sexual knowledge. The tree of knowledge is the means to sexual knowledge. The advocates of this interpretation have pointed out that the verb (Strong’s #3045), ‘know’ occurs frequently as a euphemism for sexual relations (Genesis 4:1; 19:5). When Adam and Eve acquired the knowledge of good and evil, they recognized their nakedness and experienced feelings of shame. Finally, several parallel passages containing the phrase ‘knowing good and evil’ can be reasonably interpreted as referring to sexual knowledge. (Deuteronomy 1:39; 2 Samuel 19:35; “1QSa,” abbr. for “Rule of the congregations.”(?))
Matthew Poole states on Deuteronomy 1:39: “Had no knowledge between good and evil; a common description of the state of childhood, as Jonah 4:11.”
One unnamed anti-seedliner said: “Most seedliners go wrong at this point by correlating the eating or touching of the fruit of the tree to intercourse. But, when Adam received his directions from God, there was no female around for intercourse, so how could these words be made ti imply sexual activity. Now, where does that leave these speculators (meaning Two Seedliners)?”
We will next see this is not speculation, on our part, concerning the words “eating” and “touching” having sexual connotations. The first of the anti-seedliners as far as I know is Stephen E. Jones, in his 1978 book “The Babylonian connection,” to take issue with the Two Seedliners.
You may well ask, then, what is the purpose for my writing about this anyway? The answer to this question is: I am duty bound by Yahweh’s Law to witness to the truth to the best of my ability as I understand it. In other words, if I know a crime has been committed, in the process of being committed or there is a danger of a crime about to be committed, if I do not witness to what I know, I am as guilty as the person committing the crime. In this case, we are not talking about a single individual crime, we are talking about tens of thousands of crimes. The news of these crimes has been withheld from the public by the usual news media and writers of the past. The law concerning the witness of a crime is found in Leviticus 5:1 which reads: “And if a soul sin, and hear the voice of swearing, and is a witness whether he hath seen or know of it; IF HE DO NOT UTTER it, then he shall bear his iniquity.”
A second Scripture which commands us to expose the truth is found in Ephesians 5:11, which says: “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”
“The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge,” edited by Jerome H. Smith says this on page 132: “...such an one shall bear his iniquity — shall be considered as guilty in the sight of God of the transgression which he has endeavored to conceal, and must expect to be punished for hiding the iniquity with which he was acquainted.”
I refuse, therefore, to sit idly by and share the guilt for these crimes with our enemy. The anti-seedliners, by not identifying the enemy, are sharing equally in these crimes with the “Jews.” By taking this stance, they are actually doing more damage than the “Jews” are implementing. They are, in practice, partaking of these “Jewish” crimes.
Inasmuch as I have put in a very considerable amount of time studying in the last several years and know the nature of the enemy, I find it my duty to inform whoever I can of who our opponent is and his agenda.
We have an enemy. It’s unpleasant enough that we must live under the political, religious and monetary system of the enemy, but it is intolerable, while all this is happening, to have distracting, booing, detractors on the sidelines proclaiming there is no enemy; that somehow they, the “Jews,” (Revelation 2:9, 3:9) are simply ordinary people who happened to go bad. We don’t know how those gainsaying disputants discount the fact that they and their continued lineage, remain corrupt generation after generation, for thousands of years. It is quite obvious that the “Jews” have retained an inbred, genetic trait which is built into their very being, clearly inherited from their ancestors. Thus, there are two genetic peoples at WAR with each other, according to the declaration of Genesis 3:15, and this WAR will not terminate until one side or the other is completely destroyed. At the moment, our side is speedily going down to defeat.
In Wars 2:8:2. Josephus makes it quite clear that the Pharisees and Sadducees were essentially non-Israelites by birth. Let’s read this passage: “For there are three philosophical sects among the Judeans. The followers of the first of whom are the Pharisees; of the second the Sadducees; and the third sect, who pretends to a severer discipline, are called Essenes. The last are Judah by birth, and seem to have a greater affection for one another than the other sects have.”
It would appear that of these three sects mentioned, only the Essenes could claim to be pure blooded Israelites; that many, perhaps a majority of the Pharisees and Sadducees, were neither true Israelites, nor, of the true Tribe of Judah. Why didn’t Josephus mention the Pharisees and Sadducees as being Judah by birth? We know that in John 8:33 & 37, it is apparent from that rendition, that the scribes and Pharisees could possibly be true Israelites.
Sure, the Arabs can claim Abraham as their father. We know, also, that the “Jews” of Messiah’s day had absorbed Edomite blood, and therefore could claim both Abraham and Isaac as their fathers. The Shelanite-Judahites could even claim an affinity with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Judah, yet that doesn’t make them of the true Tribe of Judah. For evidence that the “Jews” are not who they claim to be, we will no quote from the “A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica,” by John Lightfoot, volume 2, pages 7-9: “... Common persons, as to the priesthood: such whose fathers, indeed were sprung from priests, but their mothers unfit to be admitted to the priest’s marriage-bed ... such as were born in wedlock; but that which was unlawful...bastards: such as came of a certain mother, but of an uncertain father...Such as were gathered up out of the streets, whose fathers and mothers were uncertain. (See Ezra: Chapters 9 & 10)
“A defiled generation (race) indeed! And, therefore, brought up out of Babylon in this common sink, according to the opinion of the Hebrews, that the whole Jewish seed still remaining there might not be polluted by it ... Therefore he brought them to Jerusalem, and where care might be taken by the Sanhedrin [Sanhedrin] fixed there, that the legitimate might not marry with the illegitimate...
“How great a care ought there to be in the families of the pure blood, to preserve themselves untouched and clean from this impure sink; and to lay up among themselves genealogical scrolls from generation to generation as faithful witnesses and lasting monuments of their legitimate stock and free blood.
“Hear a complaint and a story in his case: ‘R. Jochanan said, By the Temple, it is in our hand to discover who are not of pure blood in the land of Israel: but what shall I do, when the chief men of this generation lie hid? (That is, when they are not of pure blood, and yet we must not declare so much openly concerning them) ‘He was of the same opinion with R. Isaac, who said...A family (of the polluted blood) that lies hid, let it lie hid. Abai also saith, We have learned this also by tradition, That there was a certain family called the family of Beth-zeriphua beyond Jordan, and a son of Zion removed it away.’ (The Goss is, Some eminent man, by a public proclamation, declared it impure) ‘But he caused another which was such’ (that is, impure) ‘to come near. And there was another which the wise men would not manifest.’
“...When it especially lay upon the Sanhedrin (Sanhedrin), settled at Jerusalem to preserve pure families, as much as in them lay, pure still; and when they prescribed canons of preserving the legitimation of the people (which you ay see in those things that follow at the place alleged), there was some necessity to lay up public records of pedigrees with them: whence it might be known what family was pure, and what defiled. Hence that of Simon Ben Azzai deserves our notice: ‘I say (saith he) a genealogical scroll in Jerusalem, in which it was thus written; ‘N., a bastard of a strange wife.’ Observe, that even a bastard was written in their books of genealogy, that he might be known to be a bastard, and that the purer families mighty take heed of the defilement of the seed...”
We are sure that Messiah was NOT gathering an accumulation of bastards, which the Pharisees and Sadducees for the most part were. The anti-seedliners really have a problem with Genesis 3:15 & 4:1, for if Cain was the son of Adam, there wouldn’t have been any difference between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. If such a thing were true, which it isn’t, we might as well invite the descendants of Cain into our churches and Identity meetings. Recently, John Hagee had about ten “Jewish” professors and advisors. “Insight On The Scriptures,” volume 2, pages 887 & 889, says this about the serpent’s seed: “... Jesus identified the Jewish religious leaders of his day as a part of the Serpent’s seed, saying to them: ‘Serpents, offspring [Gr., gen-ne’ma-ta, generated ones’] of vipers, how are you to flee from the judgement of Gehenna? Matthew 23:33, Int.”...“enmity between the two seeds. The great serpent Satan the Devil has produced ‘seed’ that has manifested the bitterest enmity toward those who have served God with faith like Abraham, as the Bible record abundantly testifies. Satan has tried to block or hinder the development of the woman’s seed, (Compare Matthew 13:24-30).”
This is what John Lightfoot has to say about Matthew 3:7 where John the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees “vipers,” in his “A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica,” volume 2, pages 77-78: “Not so much ‘the seed of Abraham,’ which ye boast of, as ‘the seed of the serpent’...A nation and offspring diametrically opposite, and an enemy to that seed of the woman, and WHICH WAS TO BRUISE HIS HEEL...Hence, not without round, it is concluded that that nation was rejected and given over to a reprobate sense, EVEN BEFORE THE COMING OF CHRIST.
“They were not only...a generation (race), but...an offspring of vipers , serpents sprung from serpents. Nor is it a wonder that they were rejected by God, when they had long since rejected God, and God’s word, by their traditions...There was, in deed a certain remnant among them to be gathered by Christ: and when that was gathered, the rest of the nation was delivered over to everlasting perdition ...”
Again on page 83 of the same book, John Lightfoot says the following: “The war proclaimed of old in Eden between the serpent, and the seed of the serpent, and the seed of the woman, Genesis 3:15, now takes place; when that promised seed of the woman comes forth into the field (being initiated by baptism, and anointed by the Holy Ghost, unto the public office of his ministry) to fight with the old serpent, and at last to bruise his head. And, since the devil was always a most imprudent spirit, now he takes upon him a more hardened boldness than ever, even of waging war with him whom he knew to be the Son of God, because from that ancient proclamation of this war he knew well enough that he should bruise his heel.”
In Matthew 3:7; 12:34 and 23:33 both John the Baptist and Yahshua called the Pharisees and Sadducees “a generation (race) of vipers,” and in Matthew 12:39 Yahshua spoke of them as “an evil and adulterous (bastard) generation (race)” (adulterous meaning mixed...impure, bastards). The following are remarks from some various commentaries:
“Adam Clarke’s,” abridged by Earle, page 770: “An evil and adulterous generation. Or ‘race of people.’ Our Lord terms the Jews an adulterous race.”
“Adam Clarke’s,” abridged by Earle, page 770: “O generation of vipers. A terribly expressive speech. A serpentine brood, from a serpentine stock. As their fathers were, so were they, children of the wicked one.”
“Matthew Henry’s,” vol. 5, page 24: “The title he gives them is, O generation of vipers. Christ gave them the same title; Matthew 12:34; 23:33. They were as vipers; though specious yet venomous and poisonous, and full of malice and enmity to everything that was good; they were a viperous brood, the seed and offspring of such as had been of the same spirit; it was bred in the bone with them.
“They gloried in it, that they were the seed of Abraham; but John showed them that they were the serpent’s seed (Compare Genesis 3:15); of their father the devil, (John 8:44). They were a viperous gang, they were all alike; though enemies to one another, yet confederate in mischief. Note: A wicked generation is a generation of vipers, and they ought to be told so ...”
“Matthew Henry’s,” vol. 5, page 175: “He condemns the demand, as the language of an evil and adulterous generation, v. 39. He fastens the charge, not only on the scribes and pharisees, but the whole nation of the Jews; they were all like their leaders, a seed and succession of evil doers: they were an evil generation indeed, that not only hardened themselves against the conviction of Christ’s miracles, but set themselves to abuse him, and put contempt on his miracles. They were an adulterous generation...As an adulterous brood; so miserably degenerated...that Abraham and Israel acknowledged them not.”
“Matthew Henry’s,” vol. 5, page 174: “They were a generation of vipers: John [the] Baptist had called them so (Matthew 3:7), and they were still the same; for can the Ethiopian change his skin? The people looked upon the Pharisees as a generation of saints, but Christ calls them a generation of vipers, the seed of the serpent, that had an enmity to Christ and his gospel. Now what would be expected from a generation of vipers, but that which is poisonous and malignant? Can the viper be otherwise than venomous?”
This is another aspect which should be delved into concerning the cursed “Jewish” nation at the time of the Messiah. Without this understanding, it is difficult to comprehend the conditions surrounding the “Jewish” nation at that period. Once that view is understood and grasped, a very different view will be perceived. This is a topic which has NOT been addressed, at any length, by the clergy of nominal churchianity or, for that matter among those who understand the Israel Identity message. It is paramount that we understand the complexities of that period, for if we don’t, we simply cannot fathom the elements which were coming into play during that time. Once we comprehend this, we will not be prone to make ludicrous statements such as those which some of the preachers have spewed (vomited) out. (Proverbs 26:11; 23:8; 2 Peter 2:22)
We will first introduce the general story and then present the documentation. First, let’s consider the Scripture where Messiah condemned the “Jews” for their proselytizing, Matthew 23:15: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.”
In Matthew Chapter 3, we are told of John the Baptist and his endeavor to prepare the way for the Messiah by conversion and baptizing. It seems here, according to the story, the Pharisees and Sadducees came and inquired of John what he was doing. Forthrightly, John informed the “Jews,” he didn’t baptize “vipers.”
Why were the Pharisees and Sadducees so interested in what John the Baptist was doing? Many may be unaware of the fact that the Pharisees and Sadducees were also baptizing their converts. The requirement to become a “Jewish” proselyte was firstly, to be circumcised, and when the wound was healed, then secondly, the candidate was baptized. The “Jews” considered that when their candidate went down into the water he was a heathen, and when he came back up, he was an Israelite.
This is fantastic, for a non-Israelite could be baptized thousands of times and it would not make him an Israelite. And of just whom were these “jews” baptizing and making proselytes? Many were the of the seven Canaanite nations. Now some excerpts from pages 55 to 63 from “A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica,” volume 2, by John Lightfoot: “Whensoever any heathen will betake himself, and be joined to the covenant of Israel, and place himself under the wings of the divine Majesty, and take the yoke of the law upon him, voluntary circumcision, baptism, and oblation, are required...That was a common axiom...No man is a proselyte until he be circumcised and baptized...[because none becomes a proselyte without circumcision and baptism] of the Sanhedrin...If with a proselyte his sons and his daughters are made proselytes also, that which is done by their father redounds to their good...A heathen women, if she is made a proselytess, when she is now big with child, the child needs not baptism...for the baptism of his mother serves for him for baptism...‘If an Israelite take a Gentile child...or find a Gentile infant, and baptizeth him in the name of a proselyte; behold, he is a proselyte’...First, You see baptism inseparably joined to the circumcision of proselytes. There was, indeed some little distance of time; for ‘they were not baptized till the pain of circumcision was healed, because water might be injurious to the wound.’ but certainly baptism ever followed...
“Secondly, Observing from these things which have been spoken, how very known and frequent that use of baptism was among the Jews, the reason appears very easy why the Sanhedrin, by their messengers, inquired not of John concerning the reason of baptism, but concerning the authority of the baptizer; not what baptism meant, but whence he had a license so to baptize, John 1:25...For the admission of a proselyte was reckoned no light matter...Proselytes are dangerous to Israel, like the itch...When a proselyte was to be circumcised, they first asked him concerning the sincerity of his conversion to Judaism: whether he offered not himself to proselytism for the obtaining of riches, for fear, or for love to some Israelite woman...As soon as he grows whole of the wound of circumcision, they bring him to baptism; and being laced in the water, they again instruct him in some weightier and in some lighter commands of the law. Which being heard...he plunges himself, and comes up, and behold, he is as an Israelite in all things...
“...but a proselyte was baptized not only into the washing-off of that Gentile pollution, nor only thereby to be transplanted into the religion of the Jews; but that, by the most accurate rite of translation that could possibly be, he might so pass into an Israelite, that, being married to an Israelite woman, he might produce a free and legitimate seed, and an undefiled offspring. Hence, servants that were taken into a family were baptized; and servants also that were to be made free: not so much because they were defiled with heathen uncleanness, as that, by that rite...becoming Israelites in all respects, they might be more fit to match [mate] with Israelites, and their children be accounted as Israelites. And hence the sons of proselytes, in following generations, were circumcised indeed, but not baptized. They were circumcised, that they might take upon themselves the obligation of the law; but they needed not baptism, because they were already Israelites. [Bull manure!]...The baptism of proselytes was the bringing over of Gentiles into the Jewish relation...”
You can see from this, things at that period were not at all like we are led to believe. The people of that “Jewish” nation had so corrupted themselves genetically, there were hardly any pureblooded Israelites left among them. Here you have the facts laid out before you, so that it will save you a lot of homework on your part. All you have to do is verify them. It would appear the time has come for some who follow the teachings of anti-seedliners to wake up and get the wax out of their ears. Here is substantial evidence the anti-seedliners are not as informed as they should be. Not only are the Judeo-Christian clergy of today blind to the conditions of that nation, but we have those in Israel Identity who have been trained in the Judeo-churchianity theological centers who aren’t much better.
It takes a lot of time and effort, sweat and blood, to put research like this together. Furthermore, if one cannot see the parallel between what is going on today, with all of the mixed-racial marriages, just as the Judeans of that day were taking strange wives and strange husbands, one has to be blind. They were taking others in marriage who were often descended from the seven Canaanite nations. There were some pureblooded Benjamites who were still in Galilee, from whom Yahshua took all of His disciples except one, as there were some Essenes in Judea.
The matter of the Two Seedlines is of the utmost importance in our day, for we are beginning to see the culmination of this age-old “enmity” coming to a head. While it has been lying festering just below the surface for several thousands of years, today it is reaching its peak. It’s like a giant abscess getting ready to erupt and spill out all its foul, infectious, corrupt, putrefying poison. And, while these great evil underground forces are at work, the Judeo-Christian churchianity sits idly on the sidelines pretending all is well. In fact, the infection from this giant abscess is sweeping into their midst, and they consider it “Christian.” To show you this, we will not quote excepts from Dr. Lightfoot in his “A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica,” volume 2, pages 367-369 concerning Matthew 27:38-46: “Among the monsters of the Jewish routs, preceding the destruction of the city, the multitude of robbers, and the horrible slaughters committed by them, deservedly claim the first consideration; which, next to the just vengeance of God against that most wicked nation, you may justly ascribe to divers originals.
1). It is no wonder, if that nation abounded beyond measure with a vagabond, dissolute, and lewd sort of young men; since, by means of polygamy, and the divorces of their wives at pleasure and the nation’s unspeakable addictedness to lasciviousness and whoredoms, there could not but continually spring up bastards, and an offspring born only to beggary or rapine, as wanting both sustenance and ingenuous education.
2) The foolish and sinful indulgence of the council could not but nurse up all kind of broods of wicked men, while they scarce ever put any one to death, though never so wicked, as being a Jew; who must not by any means be touched...the power of darkness, Luke 22:53.
God who had foretold of old, that the serpent should bruise the heel of the promised seed, and now that time is come, had slackened the devil’s chain, which, in regard of men, the Divine Providence used to hold in his hand; so that all the power and all the rancor of hell might, freely and without restraint, assault Christ; and that all that malice that was in the devil against the whole elect of God, [would be] summed up and gathered together into one head, might at one stroke and onset be brandished against Christ without measure.”
If you listen to the anti-seedliners, they will claim there was “no power of hell” at work in the Crucifixion of the Messiah. They delegate all of that to some kind of “spiritual” hocus-pocus, making mockery of the foundational tenets of Scripture.
“Yahshua’s Heel Bruised by Judas!!!”
We have a direct connection, here, with Judas, and the “serpent,” if we read John 13:18: “I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eatheth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.”
The scripture spoken of here, which was fulfilled in Judas, the Jew, was Genesis 3:15! Does that sound ‘spiritual’? Judas was a Kenite-Canaanite “Jew-devil,” a descendant of Cain fathered by Satan! However, there is a problem here because it says that “he (Judas, the Jew) hath lifted up his heel against me” whereas Genesis 3:15 says, that “thou (the seed of the serpent) shall bruise his (Yahshua’s) heel.” Is it the “heel” of Judas or Yahshua that is affected? We are quite certain that John 13:18 is referring to Genesis 3:15, as it is indicating that it is a fulfillment of Scripture.
Tell us, what other Scripture could it be? There isn’t any. There is another Scripture, Psalm 41:9, that reads similarly to John 13:18, but John 13:18 is not a fulfillment of Psalm 41:9; as a matter of fact, Psalm 41:9 is not a prophecy about anything. The prophecy then can only be Genesis 3:15! And genesis 3:15 is definitely a prophecy. Therefore, there has to be a slight mistranslation in Genesis 3:15! Let’s try to render it in a manner which makes some sense: “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it (her seed) shall bruise thy had and thy heel shall (rise up and) bruise him (her seed).”
Its not the seed of the serpent that was to bruise the heel of Yahshua, but the seed of the serpent will lift up his heel and bruise Yahshua (the seed of the woman). Now, Yahshua is not the only seed of the woman. All of Eve’s descendants are the seed of the woman. Once we understand that it is the seed of the serpent (in the person of Judas) that was to lift up his heel against the messiah, we can better understand Isaiah 53:5: “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.”
On good comment on John 13:18, is from the “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown “Commentary On The Whole Bible,” page 1058: “I speak not of you all; the ‘happy are ye,’ of vs. 17, being on no supposition applicable to Judas. I know whom I have chosen; in the higher sense. But that the scripture may be fulfilled, i.e., one has been added to your number, by no accident or mistake, who is none of Mine, but just that he might fulfill his predicted destiny. He that eateth bread with me; ‘did eat of my bread.’
“It was Judas that raised up his heel against Him and bruised Him. It probably should be pointed out here what is meant by ‘lifting up the heel.’ It is described as someone who kicks out at the person who is feeding him. Judas, planning to betray Yahshua while eating of the sacrificial supper, did just that, and it is known as ‘lifting up the heel.’ This ‘heel’ in John 13:18 is the same ‘heel’ as in Genesis 3:15. This type of action was considered one of the most insulting things a man could do. Of course, what else would you expect of the devil?
“Just before this ‘lifting up the heel’ on the part of Judas by partaking of the last supper, some interesting statements are made. They were having a foot washing lesson from Yahshua. Verse 10 say, ‘Yahshua saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean (pure) every white: and y are clean (pure), but not all.’ Yahshua is indicating that all the disciples are clean (pure) racially, but no amount of washing would make Judas clean (pure).
“A second statement in this 18th verse is also interesting it says, ‘I speak not of you all.’ Again Yahshua is excluding Judas from the others. ‘I know whom I have chose.’ I am not deceived in my choice. I knew what was going to happen from the very beginning of the enmity of the serpent. I have chosen the very beginning of the enemy of the serpent. I have chosen Judas as a ‘serpent’ and I plainly foresaw that he would raise up the heel and deliver Me. Did not I foretell this at the time of the curse upon the ‘serpent?’
Matthew 26:14-16: “Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests, And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him.”
If you can’t see “Jew” written all over this action on the part of this “serpent,” Judas, you have to be blind. For the Jews are the most traitorous people that have ever existed in all of the history of the world. Yet, Judas was only doing his father’s (the devil) bidding, John 12:4-6: “Then said one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, which should betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.”
Not only was this “serpent-Jew” a traitor, he was a thief; just like the “Jewish” IRS and Federal Reserve System of today. Here is more evidence that Judas was the offspring of Satan: “Like the Spirit that is within Yahweh’s children (seed of the woman), so there is a counter-spirit within the ‘serpent’s’ children. That is why it just came natural for Judas to betray Yahshua. It says here that the devil put it into the heart of Judas to betray the Messiah. The children of Satan have a certain nature about them, and under various circumstances, they will react in predictable behavior patterns. The Messiah understood exactly what the behavior pattern
is yet more evidence that the ‘Jews,’ are a Satanic seedline. You cannot change the nature of a rattlesnake, nor can you change the nature of a ‘Jew.’ So much for ‘Jews for Jesus?’” (See also Jeremiah 13:23)
All this is totally oblivious to the anti-seedliners. Speaking further on page 83 of volume 2, Lightfoot says of that nation: “That the nation, under the second Temple was given to magical arts beyond measure ... That it was given to easiness of believing all manner of delusions beyond measure. And one may safely suspect, that those voices which they thought to be from heaven, and noted with the name Bath Kol, were either formed by the devil in the air to deceive the people, or by magicians by devilish art to promote their own affairs ... The very same which I judge of the Bath Kol, is [in] my opinion also of the frequent appearances of Elias, with which the leaves of the Talmud do every where abound; namely, that in very many places the stories are false, and, in the rest, the apparitions of him were diabolical.”
The “magical arts” used by the “Jews” is called the “Cabala” (sometimes spelled Cabbala, Kabbalah or Qabbalah). According to Warren Weston in his “Father Of Lies,” page 51: “The four collections of works composing the Dogmatic Kabbalah are:
1). The Sepher Yetzirah, or the ‘Book of the Formation:’ it treats of the cosmogony as symbolized by ten members and twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet, which it calls the ‘thirty-two paths’ or symbols, with the esoteric zero making thirty-three in all...The whole Kabbalah is usually classed under four heads: (1) The Practical Kabbalah; (2) the Literal Kabbalah; (3) the Unwritten Kabbalah; (4) the Dogmatic Kabbalah...
2). The Zohar, or book of ‘Splendor,’ itself composed of five important books (besides other treaties) ... These five are Siphra Dtzenioutha, or ‘Book of Concealed Mystery;’ are: Siphra Dtzenioutha, or ‘Book of concealed Mystery;’ Idra Rabba Qadisha, or ‘greater Holy Assembly;’ Idra Zuta Qadisha, or ‘Lesser Holy Assembly;’ Beth Elohim, or ‘House of the Elohim;’ and the ‘Book of the Revolutions of the soul.’
3). The Sepher Sephiroth, or ‘Book of Numbers’ (or Emanations) ... Sephira, ‘number’ (singular); Sephiroth (plural).
4). The Asch Metzareph, or ‘Purifying Fire,’ dealing with Alchemy.”
While a good deal of the form of the Cabala can be traced to the second century, the substance appears to originate form remote antiquity, possibly as remote as Cain. In the book “trail of the Serpent,” by Miss Stoddard, page 25, the Cabala is described: “The Practical or Magical Cabala with its combinations and correspondences was the astrological, magical, and magnetic basis used by the Alchemists and Magicians of the Middle Ages in working their transmutations and conjurations. It was impregnated with the ‘fludic magic’ derived from very ancient cults, and still practiced at the time of the captivity among the Persians and Chaldeans. Today, all Rosicrucians and Cabalistic sects use this Magical Cabala for their woks of divining, clairvoyance, hypnotic and magnetic healing, making of talismans, and contracting their mysterious masters. As the Jewish writer Bernard Lazare said: ‘Secret societies represented the two sides of the Jewish mind, practical rationalism and pantheism, that pantheism which, metaphysical reflection of the belief in One god, ended at times in cabalistic theurgy.’”
The Jews Believe in More than Thirty Gods!
Now these Sephiroth, or the world of emanations, or the atzilatic world, gave birth to three worlds in the following order: From the conjunction [copulation] of the king and queen, or the Briatic world, also called the throne, which is the abode of pure spirits, and which, like its parents, consists of Ten Sephiroth, or Emanations.
The Briatic World, again, gave rise to, (2). The Word of Formation, or the Jetziratic World, which is the habitation of the angels, and also consists of ten Sephiroth; whilst the Jetziratic World, again, sent forth. (3). The World of Action, or the Assiatic World, also called the World of Keliphoth, which contains the Spheres and matter, and is the residence of the Prince of Darkness and his legions.
Or, as the Sohar describes it: "After the Sephiroth, and for their use, God made the Throne (the world of Creation), with four legs and six steps, thus making ten (the decade of Sephiroth which each world has)...For this Throne and its service he formed the ten Angelic hosts (the World of Formation), Malachim, Arelim, Chajoth, Ophanim, Chashmalim, Elim, Elohim, Benei Elohim, Ishim, and Seraphim, and for their service, again, he made Samaël and his legions (the World of Action), who are, as it were, the clouds upon which the angels ride in their descent on the earth, and serve, as it were, for their horses. Hence it is written: 'Behold the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt.'" ((Isa. xix, 1) (Sohar ii, 43a)) There are, therefore, four worlds, each of which has a separate Sephiric system, consisting of a decade of emanations.
(1). The Atzilatic World, called alternately the World of Emanations, the Image (== with prefixed), and the Heavenly Man, which, by virtue of its being a direct emanation from God and most intimately allied with the Deity, is perfect and immutable.
(2). The Briatic World, called the World of Creation and the Throne which is the immediate emanation of the former, and whose ten Sephiroth, being further removed from the En Soph, are of a more limited and circumscribed potency, through the substances they comprise are of the purest nature and without any admixture of matter.
(3). The Jetziratic World, called the World of Formation and the World of Angels, which proceeded from the former world, and whose ten Sephiroth, though of a still less refined substance than the former, because further removed from the primordial source, are still without matter. It is in this angelic world where those intelligent and incorporeal beings reside, who are wrapped in a luminous garment, and who assume a sensuous form when they appear to man. And;
(4). The Assiatic World, called the World of Action and the World of Matter which emanated from the preceding world, the ten Sephiroth of which are made up of the grosser elements of all the former three worlds, and which has sunk down in consequence of its materiality and heaviness. It substances consist of matter limited by space and perceptible to the senses in a multiplicity of forms. It is subject to constant changes, generations, and corruptions, and is the abode of the Evil Spirit.
Before leaving this doctrine about the creation of the relationship of the Supreme Being to the universe, we must reiterate two things.
(1). Though the trinity of the Sephiroth gave birth to the universe, or, in other words, is an evolution of the emanations, and is thus a further expansion of the Deity itself, it must not be supposed that the Kabbalists believe in a Trinity in our sense of the word. Their view on this subject will best be understood from the following remark in the Sohar: "Whoso wishes to have an insight into the sacred unity, let him consider a flame rising from a burning coal or a burning lamp. He will see first a twofold light, a bright white and a black or blue light; the white light is above, and ascends in a direct light, whilst the blue or dark light is below, and seems as the chair of the former, yet both are so intimately connected together that they constitute only one flame. The seat, however, formed by the blue or dark light, is again connected with the burning matter which is under it again. The white light never changes its color, it always remains white; but various shades are observed in the lower light, whilst the lowest light, moreover, takes two directions, above it is connected with the white light, and below with the burning matter. Now this is constantly consuming itself, and perpetually ascends to the upper light, and thus everything merges into a single unity. (Sohar, i, 51a)
(2). The creation, or the universe, is simply the garment of God woven from the deity’s own substance; or, as Spinoza expresses it, God is the immanent basis of the universe. For although, to reveal himself to us, the Concealed of all the Concealed sent forth the Ten Emanations called The Form of God, Form of the Heavenly man, yet since even this luminous form was too dazzling for our vision, it had to assume another form, or had to put on another garment which consists of the universe. The universe, therefore, or The Visible World, is a further expansion of The Divine Substance, and is called The Kabbalah “The Garment of God."
Thus we are told, "when the Concealed of all the Concealed wanted to reveal himself, he first made a point [the first Sephira], shaped it into a sacred form [the totality of the Sephiroth], and covered it with a rich and splendid garment that is the world." (Sohar, i, 2a)
(3). The Creation of Angels and Men.
The different worlds which successively emanated from the En Soph and from each other, and which sustain the relationship to the Deity of first, second, third, and fourth generations, are, with the exception of the first (the World of Emanations), inhabited by spiritual beings of various grades. "God animated every part of the firmament with a separate spirit, and forthwith all the heavenly hosts were before him. This is meant by the Psalmist, when he says, (Ps. xxxiii, 6) 'By the breath of his mouth were made all their hosts.'" (Sohar, iii, 68a)
These angels consist of two kinds, good and bad; they have their respective princes, and occupy the three habitable worlds in the following order. As has already been remarked, the first world, or the Archetypal Man, in whose image everything is formed, is occupied by no one else. The angel Metatron occupies the second or the Briatic World, which is the first habitable world; he alone constitutes the world of pure spirits. He is the garment of the visible manifestation of the Deity; his name is numerically equivalent to that of the Lord. (Sohar, iii, 231a)
He governs the visible world, preserves the unity, harmony, and the revolutions of all the spheres, planets and heavenly bodies, and is the Captain of the myriads of the angelic hosts who people the second habitable or the Jetziratic World, and who are divided into ten ranks, answering to the ten Sephiroth. Each of these angels is set over a different part of the universe. One has the control of one sphere, another of another heavenly body; one angel has charge of the sun, another of the moon, another of the earth, another of the sea, another of the fire, another of the wind, another of the light, another of the seasons, etc.,; and the question, however, about the doctrine of the Trinity in other passages of the Sohar will be discussed more amply in the sequel, where we shall point out the relation of the Kabbalah to Christianity.
The Kabbalistic description of Metatron is taken from the Jewish angelogy of a much older date than this theosophy. Thus Ben Asai and Ben Soma already regard the divine voice, as Metatron. (Beresh. Rab., Parsha v) He is called the Great Teacher, the Teacher of Teachers, and it is for this reason that Enoch, who walked in close communion with God, and taught mankind by his holy example, is said by the Chaldee paraphrase of Jonathan b. Uzziel, to 'have received the name Metatron, the Great Teacher' after he was transplanted. (Gen. v, 24) Metatron, moreover, is the Presence Angel, the Angel of the Lord that was sent to go before Israel; (Exod. xxiii, 21) he is the visible manifestation of the Deity, for in him is the name of the Lord, his name and that of the Deity are identical, inasmuch as they are of the same numerical value (viz.: and are the same according to the exegetical rule called Gematria, 10 + 4 + 300 = 314; 50 + 6 + 200 + 9 + 9 + 40 = 314. ((See Rashi on Exod. xxiii, 21, and Sanhedrin 38b)) So exalted is Metatron's position in the ancient Jewish angelology, that we are told that when Elisha b. Abnja, also called Acher, saw this angel who occupies the first position after the Deity, he exclaimed, 'Peradventure, but far be it, there are two supreme powers.' (Talmud, Chagiga, 15a) The etymology is greatly disputed; but there is no doubt that it is to be derived from metator, messenger, outrider, way maker, as has been shown by Elias Levita, and is maintained by Cassel. ((Ersch und Gruber's Encyklopädie, section ii, vol. xxvii, s.v.; Juden, p. 40, note 84))
Sachs ((beiträge zur Sprachund Alterthumsforschung, vol. i, Berlin 1852, p. 108)) rightly remarks that this etymology is fixed by the passage from Siphra, (quoted in kaphter‑Va‑Pherach, c. x, p. 34b) the finger of God was the messenger or guide to Moses, and showed him all the land of Israel. The termination has been appended to obtain the same numerical value.
The derivation of it from the angel is immediately under the divine throne, which is maintained by Frank, (Kabbala, p. 43) Graetz (Gnosticismus, p. 44) and others, has been shown by Frankel ((Zeitschrift, 1846 vol. iii, p. 113)) and Cassel, (Ersch und Gruber's Encyklop. section ii, vol. xxvii, p. 41) to be both contrary to the form of the word and to the description of Metatron.
These angels derive their names from the heavenly bodies they respectively guard. Hence one is called Venus, one Mars, one the substance of Heaven, one the angel of light, and another the angel of fire. (Comp. Sohar i, 42, etc.) The demons, constituting the second class of angels, which are the grossest and most deficient of all forms, and are the shells of being, inhabit the third habitable or Assiatic World. They, too, form ten degrees, answering to the decade of Sephiroth, in which darkness and impurity increase with the descent of each degree. Thus the two first degrees are nothing more than the absence of all visible form and organization, which the Mosaic cosmology describes in the words before the hexahemeron, and which the Septuagint renders.
The third degree is the abode of the darkness which the book of Genesis describes as having in the beginning covered the face of the earth. Whereupon follow seven infernal halls == Hells, occupied by the demons, which are the incarnation of all human vices, and which torture those poor deluded beings who suffered themselves to be led astray in this world. These seven infernal halls are subdivided into endless compartments, as to afford a separate chamber of torture for every species of sin.
The prince of this region of darkness, who is called Satan in the Bible, is denominated by the Kabbalah, Samaël == angel of poison or of death. He is the same evil spirit, Satan, the Serpent, who seduced Eve. He has a wife, called the Harlot or the Woman of Whoredom, but they are both generally represented as united in the one name of the Beast. (Comp. Sohar, ii, 255‑259, with i, 35b)
The whole universe, however, was incomplete, and did not receive its finishing stroke till man was formed, who is the acme of the creation, and the microcosm uniting in himself the totality of beings.
"The heavenly Adam (the ten Sephiroth), who emanated from the highest primordial obscurity (the En Soph), created the earthly Adam." (Sohar, ii, 70b)
"Man is both the import and the highest degree of creation, for which reason he was formed on the sixth day. As soon as man was created, everything was complete, including the upper and nether worlds, for everything is comprised in man. He unites in himself all forms." (Sohar, iii, 48a)
Man was created with faculties and features far transcending those of the angels. The bodies of the protoplasts were not of that gross matter which constitutes our bodies. Adam and Eve, before the fall, were wrapped in that luminous ethereal, substance in which the celestial spirits are clad, and which is neither subject to want nor to sensual desires.
They were envied by the angels of the highest rank. The fall, however, changed it all, as we are told in the following passage: "When Adam dwelled in the garden of Eden, he was dressed in the celestial garment, which is a garment of heavenly light. But when he was expelled from the garden of Eden, and became subject to the wants of this world, what is written? 'The Lord God made coats of skins unto Adam and to his wife, and clothed them'; (Gen. iii, 21) for prior to this they had garments of light, light of that light which was used in the garden of Eden." (Sohar, ii, 229b)
The garments of skin, therefore, mean our present body, which was given to our first parents in order to adapt them to the changes which the fall introduced. But even in the present form, the righteous are above the angels, and every man is still the microcosm, and every member of his body corresponds to a constituent part of the visible universe.
What is man? Is he simply skin, flesh, bones, and veins? No! That which constitutes the real man is the soul, and those things which are called the skin, the flesh, the bones, and the veins, all these are merely a garment, they are simply the clothes of the man, but not the man himself. When man departs, he puts off these garments wherewith the son of man is clothed. Yet are all these bones and sinews formed in the secret of the highest wisdom, after the heavenly image.
The skin represents the firmament, which extends everywhere, and covers everything like a garment, as it is written, 'Who stretchiest out the heavens like a curtain.' (Psalm clv, 2) The flesh represents the deteriorated part of the world...the bones and the veins represent the heavenly chariot, the inner powers, the servants of God...But these are the outer garments, for in the inward part is the deep mystery of the heavenly man. Everything here below, as above, is mysterious.
Therefore it is written: 'God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him'; (Gen. i, 27) repeating the word God twice, one for the man and the other for the woman. The mystery of the earthly man is after the mystery of the Heavenly man.
And just as we see in the firmament above, covering all things, different signs which are formed of the stars and planets, and which contain secret things and profound mysteries, studied by those who are wise and expert in these signs; so there are in the skin, which is the cover of the body of the son of man, and which is like the sky that covers all things, signs and features which are the stars and planets of the skin, indicating secret things and profound mysteries, whereby the wise are attracted, who understand to read the mysteries in the human face." (Sohar, ii, 76a)
He is still the presence of god upon earth [this is where the humanist religion was born. That man is god!], and the very form of the body depicts the Tetragrammation, the most sacred name Jehovah.
Thus the head is the form of the arms and the shoulders are like the breast represents the Sephiroth from which it emanates, every soul has ten potencies, which are subdivided into a trinity of triads, and respectively represented by:
(1) The Spirit, which is the highest degree of being, and which both corresponds to and is operated upon by The Crown, representing the highest triad, in the Sephiroth, called the Intellectual World;
(2) The Soul, which is the seat of good and evil, as well as the moral qualities, and which both corresponds to and is operated upon by Beauty, representing the second triad in the Sephiroth, called the Moral World; and
(3) The Cruder Spirit, which is immediately connected with the body, is the direct cause of its lower functions, instincts, and animal life, and which both corresponds to and is operated upon by Foundation, representing the third triad in the Sephiroth, called the Material World.
In its original state each soul is androgynous, and is separated into male and female when it descends on earth to be borne in a human body. We have seen that the souls of the righteous, in the world of spirits, are superior in dignity to the heavenly powers and the ministering angels. It might, therefore, be asked why do these souls leave such as abode of bliss, and come into this vale of tears to dwell in tabernacles of clay?
The only reply to be given is that these happy souls have no choice in the matter. Indeed we are told that the soul, before assuming a human body, addresses God: "Lord of the Universe! I am happy in this world, and do not wish to go into another world, where I shall be a bond‑maid, and be exposed to all kinds of pollutions." (Sohar, ii, 96)
And can you wonder at this pitiful ejaculation? Should your philanthropic feelings and your convictions that our heavenly Father ordains all things for the good of his children, impel you to ask that an explanation of this mystery might graciously be vouchsafed to you in order to temper your compassion and calm your faith, then take this parable: "A son was born to a king; he sends him to the country, there to be nursed and brought up till he is grown up, and instructed in the ceremonies and usages of the royal palace. When the king hears that the education of his son is finished, what does his fatherly love impel him to do? For his son’s sake he sends for the Queen his mother, conducts him into the palace and makes merry with him all day.
“Thus the Holy One, blessed be he, has a son with the Queen [Here the Jews are saying it is alright for a man to make love with his own mother!]: this is the heavenly and sacred soul. He sends him into the country, that is into this world, therein to grow up and to learn the customs of the court. When the King hears that this his son has grown up in the country, and that it is time to bring him into the palace, what does his love for his son impel him to do? He sends, for his sake, for the Queen and conducts him to the palace." (Sohar, i, 215b)
As has already been remarked, the human soul, before it descends into the world, is androgynous, or in other words, consists of two component parts, each of which comprises all the elements of our spiritual nature.
Thus the Sohar tells us: “Each soul and spirit, prior to its entering into this world, consists of a male and female united into one being. When it descends on this earth the two parts separate and animate two different bodies. “At the time of marriage, the Holy One, blessed be he, who knows all souls and spirits, unites them again as they were before, and they again constitute one body and one soul, forming as it were the right and left of one individual; therefore 'There is nothing new under the sun.' (Ecl. i, 9) This union, however, is influenced by the deeds of the man and by the ways in which he walks. The soul carries her knowledge with her to the earth, so that 'everything which she learns here below she knew already, before she entered into this world.'" (Sohar, iii, 61b)
Since the form of the body as well as the soul, is made after the image of the Heavenly Man, a figure of the forth‑coming body which is to clothe the newly descending soul, is sent down from the celestial regions, to hover over the couch of the husband and wife when they copulate, in order that the conception may be formed according to this model. "At connubial intercourse on earth, the Holy One, blessed be he, sends a human form which bears the impress of the divine stamp. This form is present at intercourse, and if we were permitted to see it we should perceive over our heads an image resembling a human face; and it is in this image that we are formed. As long as this image is not sent by God and does not descend and hover over our heads, there can be no conception, for it is written: 'And God created man in his own image.' (Gen. i, 27)
This image receives us when we enter the world, it develops itself with us when we grow, and accompanies us when we depart this life; as it is written: 'Surely, man walked in an image': (Psalm xxxvii, 5) and this image is from heaven. When the souls are to leave their heavenly abode, each soul separately appears before the Holy King, dressed in a sublime form, with the features in which it is to appear in this world. It is from this sublime form that the image proceeds. It is the third after the soul, and precedes it on the earth; it is present at the conception, and there is no conception in the world where this image is not present." (Sohar, iii, 104a‑b)
All human countenances are divisible into the four primordial types of faces, which appeared at the mysterious chariot throne in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel, viz., the face of man, of the lion, the ox and the eagle. Our faces resemble these more or less according to the rank which our souls occupy in the intellectual or moral dominion; "And physiognomy does not consist in the external lineaments, but in the features which are mysteriously drawn in us. The features in the face change according to the form which is peculiar to the inward face of the spirit. It is the spirit which produces all those physiognomical peculiarities known to the wise; and it is only through the spirit that the features have any meaning. All those spirits and souls which proceed from Eden (the highest wisdom) have a peculiar form, which is reflected in the face." (Sohar, ii, 73b)
The face thus lighted up by the peculiar spirit inhabiting the body, in the mirror of the soul; and the formation of the head indicates the character and temper of the man. An arched forehead is a sign of a cheerful and profound spirit, as well as of a distinguished intellect; a broad but flat forehead indicates foolishness and silliness; whilst a forehead which is flat, compressed on the sides and spiral, betokens narrowness of mind and vanity. (Comp. Sohar, ii, 71b, 75a)
As a necessary condition of free existence and of moral being, the souls are endowed by the Deity, from the very beginning, with the power of adhering in close proximity to the primordial source of infinite light from the very beginning, with the power of adhering in close proximity to the primordial source of infinite light from which they emanated, and of alienating themselves from that source and pursuing an independent and opposite course.
Hence, Simon ben Jochai said, "If the Holy One, blessed be he, had not put within us both the good and the evil desire, which are denominated light and darkness, the created man would have neither virtue nor vice. For this reason it is written: 'Behold, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil.' (Deut. xxx, 15) To this the disciples replied, Wherefore is all this? Would it not be better if reward and punishment had not existed at all, since in that case man would have been incapable of sinning and of doing evil. He rejoined, It was meet and right that he should be created as he was created, because the Law was created for him, wherein are written punishments for the wicked and rewards for the righteous; and there would not have been any reward for the righteous and punishment for the wicked but for created man." (Sohar i, 23a)
So complete is their independence, that souls, even in their pre‑existent state, can and do choose which way they intend to pursue. "All souls which are not guiltless in this world, have already alienated themselves in heaven from the Holy One, blessed be he; they have thrown themselves into an abyss at their very existence, and have anticipated the time when they are to descend on earth...Thus were the souls before they came into this world." (Sohar, iii, 61b)
(4). The Destiny of Man and the Universe.
As the En Soph constituted man the microcosm, and as the Deity is reflected in this epitome of the universe more than in any component part of the creation, all things visible and invisible are designed to aid him in passing through his probationary state here below, in gathering that experience for which his soul has been sent down, and in returning in a pure state to that source of light from which his soul emanated.
This destiny of man, the reunion with the Deity from which he emanated, is the constant desire both of God and man, and is an essential principle of the soul, underlying its very essence. Discarding that blind power from our nature, which governs our animal life [This is where Darwin got the idea for the origin of the species], which never quits this earth, and which therefore plays no part in our spiritual being, the soul possesses two kinds of powers and two sorts of feelings.
It has the faculty for that extraordinary prophetical knowledge, which was vouchsafed to Moses in an exceptional manner, called the Luminous Mirror (speculator), and the ordinary knowledge termed the Non‑Luminous Mirror, respectively represented in the earthly Paradise by the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil; and it possesses the higher feeling of love and the lower feeling of fear. Now the full fruition of that higher knowledge and of that loftier feeling of love can only be reaped when the soul returns to the Infinite Source of Light, and is wrapped in that luminous garment which the protoplasts forfeited throughout the fall.
Thus we are told, "Come and see when the soul reaches that place which is called the Treasury of Life, she enjoys a bright and luminous mirror, which receives its light from the highest heaven. The soul could not bear this light but for the luminous mantle which she put on. For just as the soul, when sent to this earth, puts on an earthly garment to preserve herself here, so she receives above a shining garment, in order to be able to look without injury into the mirror whose light proceeds from the Lord of Light. Moses too could not approach to look into that higher light which he saw, without putting on such an ethereal garment: as it is written: 'And Moses went into the midst of the cloud.', (Exod. xxiv, 18) which is to be translated by means of the cloud wherewith he wrapped himself as if dressed in a garment. At that time Moses almost discarded the whole of his earthly nature; as it is written, 'And Moses was on the mountain forty days and forty nights' (ibid); and he thus approached that dark cloud where God is enthroned. In this wise the departed spirits of the righteous dress themselves in the upper regions in luminous garments, to be able to endure that light which streams from the Lord of Light." (Sohar, i, 65b, 66a)
“The two feelings of love and fear are designed to aid the soul in achieving her high destiny, when she shall no more look through the dark glass, but see face to face in the presence of the Luminous Mirror, by permeating all acts of obedience and divine worship. And though perfect love, which is serving God purely out of love, like that higher knowledge, is to be man's destiny in heaven, yet the soul may attain some of it on earth, and endeavor to serve God out of love and not from fear, as thereby she will have an antepast on earth of its union with the Deity, which is to be so rapturous and indissoluble in heaven.
“Yet is the service which arises from fear not to be depreciated, for fear leads to love. it is true that he who obeys God out of love has attained to the highest degree, and already belongs to the saints of the world to come, but it must not be supposed that to worship God out of fear is no worship. Such a service has also its merit, though in this case the union of the soul with the Deity is slight.
“ There is only one degree which is higher than fear: it is love. In love is the mystery of the divine unity. It is love which unites the higher and lower degrees together; it elevates everything to that position where everything must be one. This is also the mystery of the words, 'Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one God.'" (Sohar, ii, 216a)
Let us now see an example of what is contained in the Cabala. For this, we will now quote from “The Esoteric Tradition,” by G. de Purucker, volume 1, page 62: “Turning to the Jews, on may find in the Zohar; a Hebrew word meaning ‘splendor,’ which is perhaps the greatest text-book of the Jewish Qabbalah, and which has been mentioned before, a statement to the effect that the man who understand the Hebrew bible in its literal meaning is a fool. ‘Every word of it,’ says the Zohar in this connexion, ‘has a secret and sublime sense, which the wise [that is, the initiated] know.’ One of the greatest of the Jewish Rabbis of the Middle Ages.
Malmonides, who died in 1204 writes: ‘We should never take literally what is written in the Book of the Creation, nor hold the same ideas about it that the people hold. If it were otherwise, our learned ancient sages would not have been [sic, gone] to so great labor in order to conceal the real sense, and to hold before labor in order to conceal the real sense, and to hold before the vision of the uninstructed people the veil of allegory which conceals the truths that it contains.
“Taken literally, that work contains the most absurd and far-fetched ideas of the Divine. Whoever can guess the real sense, ought to guard carefully his knowledge not to divulge it. This is a rule taught by our wise men, especially in connection with the work of the six days...”
It is true that the Bible is written, to a great degree, in allegory and symbols, and if we don’t understand them, we cannot grasp the message contained therein. The “Jews,” on the other hand, attach an occult meaning to every word and phrase. Their views of Scripture are so foreign to our perspectives one would not recognize them.
Referring again to “A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica,” by John Lightfoot, volume 2, page 209: “That nation and generation might be called adulterous literally; for what else, I beseech you, was their irreligious polygamy than continual adultery? And what else was their ordinary practice of divorcing their wives, no less irreligious, according to every man’s foolish or naughty will?”
Proselytes For Gain
Again in Lightfoot, volume 2, pages 295-297 concerning Matthew 23:13-14: “Under pretense of mighty devotion, but especially under the goodly show of long prayers, they so drew over the minds of devout persons to them, especially of women, and among them the richer widows, that by subtle attractives they either drew out or wrested away their goods and estates. Nor did they want nets of counterfeit authority, when from the chair they pronounced, according to their pleasures, of the dowry and estate befalling a widow, and assumed to themselves the power of determining concerning those things ...
“Yet in making of these they used their utmost endeavors for the sake of their own gain, that they might some way or other drain their purses, after they had drawn in under the show of religion, or make some use or benefit to themselves by them. The same covetousness, therefore, under a veil of hypocrisy, in devouring widows’ houses, which our Savior condemned in the former clause, he here also condemns in hunting after proselytes; which the scribes and Pharisees were at all kind[s] of pains to bring over to their religion, the greater drought they should have for gain, and the more purses to fish in. These, therefore, being so proselyted, ‘they made doubly more the children of hell than themselves.’ For when they had drawn them into their net, having got their prey , they were no further concerned what became of them (this is how the Judeo-Christian Clergy on television, and on the radio act). They might perish in ignorance, superstition, atheism, and all kind[s] of wickedness: this was not matter of concern to the scribes and Pharisees; only let them remain in Judaism, that they might lord it over their consciences and purses.”
Arab Proselytes to Judaism
The main index of the “History of the Jews,” by Heinrich Graetz is found in volume y, and on page 512 are listed the various people proselyted by the “Jews” during their extended history. The list is too extensive to elaborate on here. We will key in on volume 3, pages 60-62 concerning the subtitle “Arabs Become Converted To Judaism” (approximately 450500 A.D.):
“Happily, the Arabian Jews bethought them of the genealogy of the Arabs as set forth in the first book of the Pentateuch, and seized upon it as the instrument by which to prove their kinship to them. The Jews were convinced that they were related to the Arabs on two sides, through Yoktan and through Ishmael. Under their instruction, therefore, the two principal Arabian tribes traced back the line of ancestors to these two progenitors, the real Arabs (the Himyarites) supposing themselves to be the descendants from Yoktan; the pseudo-Arabs in the north, on the other hand, deriving their origin from Ishmael. These points of contact granted, the Jews had ample opportunity to multiply the proofs of their relationship.
“The Arabs loved genealogical tables, and were delighted to be able to follow their descent and history so far into hoary antiquity; accordingly, all this appeared to them both evident and flattering. They consequently exerted themselves to bring their genealogical records and traditions into unison with the Biblical accounts. Although their traditions extended over less than six centuries on the one side to their progenitor Yarob and his sons or grandsons Himyar and Kachtan, and on the other, to Adnan, yet in their utter disregard of historical accuracy, this fact constituted no obstacle. Without a scruple, the southern Arabians called themselves Kachtanites, and the northern Arabians Ishmaelites. They readily accorded the Jews the rights of relationship, that is to say, equality and all the advantages attending it.
“The Arabs were thus in intimate intercourse with the Jews, and the sons of the desert whose unpoetical mythology afforded them no matter for inspiration, derived much instruction from Judaism. Under these circumstances many Arabs could not fail to develop peculiar affection for Judaism, and some embraced this religion, though their conversion had not been thought of by the Jews. As they practiced circumcision while heathen, their conversion Judaism was particularly easy. The members of a family among the Arabs were indissolubly bound to one another, and, according to their phylarchic constitution, the individuals identified themselves with the tribe. This brought about, that when a chieftain became a Jew, his whole clan at once followed him, the wisest, into the fold of Judaism. It is expressly recorded about several Arabian tribes that they were converted to Judaism; such were the Benu-Kinanah, a warlike, quarrelsome clan, related to the most respected Koraishites of Mecca, and several other families of the tribes Aus and Chazaraj in Yathrib.
“Especially memorable, however, in the history of the Arabs is the conversion of the powerful king of Yemen. The princes or kings of Yemen bore the name of Tobba, and at times ruled over the whole of Arabia; they traced their historical origin back to Himyar, their legendary Origin to Kachtan...”
This is only one example of the extensive amount of “Jewish” proselytizing in history.
In 1948, the state of Israeli was supposedly born. For 53 years now the United States has been pumping money into the Israel (the Israel-lie) in enormous amounts (billions upon billions). Sums of money that the ordinary person cannot even envision. No other nation in all history has pampered a people as the United States has mollycoddled the Israeli. If the Israeli are God’s chosen, and if the Almighty’s words are true, the United States should be receiving blessings never before conceived. Let’s take a look at what these blessings consist of:
1). We are being blessed with an ever increasing abortion rate; well, praise God for that blessing.
2). We are being blessed with an ever increasing divorce rate; isn’t that simply a wonderful blessing? Let’s praise God for that one also.
3). We are told that homosexualism and lesbianism are on the increase; what marvelous blessings there are. Let’s again praise God for those glorious blessings also.
4). Every day rape is on the upswing; isn’t it just wonderful what God is doing for us?
5). Drug addiction is going out of control; isn’t that a fabulous and wonderful blessing?
6). Personal debt is going through the ceiling;
7). Robbery and breaking and enterings are on the increase.
8). Children and adolescents are committing major crimes at a younger and younger age; what a wonderful new trend for the future.
If all of these things are blessing, we would really hate to see what a curse might be like. It would appear we were doing better when we weren’t blessing the “Jews” as much. What does it all boil down to? Just this; If the “Jews” are “God’s chosen people,” as Weiland and Hagee claim, Yahweh is a liar, for under that perquisite, we should be the most blessed nation on the earth in all of history, for no nation has ever done more for the “Jews” than we. Now, Ted R. Weiland mighty deny he implied or said such a thing, but if you will check his booklet “Eve, Did She Or Didn’t She?,” it’s exactly as we quoted him.
The Mental Seduction Theory
The prime argument used by the anti-seedliners is that Eve was “mentally” seduced rather than physically seduced. That is ludicrous. James 1:14-15 describes seven definite steps in the process of sin as follows: “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then, when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.”
The seven steps are: (1) Temptation; evil thought, (2) Drawn away; strong imagination or fantasy, (3) Lust: delight in viewing, (4) enticed: weakening of the will, (5) Lust conceived: yielding, (6): sinful act committed, (7) Death: result of the actual sin.
Not only do the anti-seedliners err concerning the full mental and physical seduction of Eve, but they accuse the Almighty of unjust punishment for her sin. In order to see this, we will have to read Genesis 3:14-16: “And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
We can see from this, that the serpent, the woman, and Adam were punished in that order for their part in that seduction.
Yahweh always punishes in like-kind. The Bible makes it clear that if a man kills another in premeditated murder, his life is required in return. Yahweh always metes out punishment to fit the crime. In all Scripture, one cannot find a single incident where this is not true. Eve’s punishment in verse 16 is: (1) to bear children in sorrow, (2) her desire was to be reserved for here husband, and (3) she is to yield to her husband’s authority.
Let’s now zero in on the punishment of “bearing children,” “in sorrow.” The word “sorrow” is #6093 in Strong’s It means “worrisomeness, i.e., labor or pain...” Gesenius’ has it for Genesis 3:16: “...they pain and thy conception’; Hendiadys for the pain of thy conception.” (“hendiadys” means; a figure in which a complex idea is expressed by two words connected by a copulative conjunction: ‘to look with the eyes and envy’ instead of ‘with envious eyes.’) In other words, “the pain of thy conception;” not “thy pain and thy conception.”
Thus, there are three separate conclusions which can be Biblically drawn from Yahweh’s pronouncement to Eve: (1) That Eve would bear children in pain; that the pain would affect the very part of the body where the sin occurred. (2) That her [sexual] desire would return to her husband (Why did Yahweh even mention it if she were always true to Adam?). It is implied here that Eve’s desire had been to someone else. (3) That Eve would return and put herself under the authority of her husband rather than the influence of the serpent.
Had Eve been guilty only of a mental crime, as the anti-seedliners so loudly proclaim. It would have been highly unjust for Yahweh to have punished her by causing her to bear children with physical paint. Christ said He was not to judge any man: “Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.” (John 8:15)
Again for a second witness: “And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.” (John 12:47)
There is fairly good evidence that the words “son of Barachias” were never in the original script. “A Commentary On The Holy Bible,” edited by Rev. J.R. Dummelow points this out on page 701: “Zaharias son of Barachias: Jesus probably said ‘Zachariah’ as in Luke, without mentioning the father’s name, but the evangelist or one of the earliest copyists, who thought it necessary to distinguish among the twenty-nine Zacharias in the Old Testament, and understood the canonical prophet to be meant, added the words ‘son of Barachias...’”
The problem is: most of the prophets were after the Zechariah of 2 Chronicles 24:21. Therefore, it is more probably that Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist is meant in Matthew 23:35, (see Protevangelion, chapter 16). In such a case, Yahshua did indeed mean all the righteous blood from Abel to Zacharias. Also, as we have pointed out that Josephus makes it quite clear that, outside of a minor few, the majority of Pharisees and Sadducees were not of the Tribe of Judah by birth, Josephus War 2:8:2.
It’s hard for us to accept that problems come from within ourselves, our family, our government, our nation, our race. It’s more appealing and acceptable if they are from without. The Cain-Satanic seedline has problems and evil coming from without; an outside source, that being Satan. Who were the enemies of Israel in the bible? Most of them were offshoots of the Adam race [bull manure]. The Midianites, the Moabites, the Ammorites, the Edomites, the Amalekites, even a lot of the Canaanites.
Remember Esau was your brother, and so was Cain, and so was Canaan, and so were those who stoned the prophets, and who killed Christ. The truth is that all the evil associated with the Jew today is from within. That is, it come from within people of the Adam race; those who were rejected by god, cursed by God, cast out etc. That is what, in part, constitutes the Jew today. Sort of the refuse of the Adamic race. God throughout history has been pruning His vine, separating out from the original Adamic stock, people like Cain, and Canaan, and Esau, and others. In conclusion, the Satanic Seedline doctrine is not Scriptural, it’s not logical; it is a false doctrine that I think we need to set aside and move on to the truth of what God has actually done in the earth...”
Again, I cannot emphasize how important it is to understand the formidable enemy with whom we have to contend. In order to fathom our present WORLD PROBLEMS, it is imperative we grasp two things: 1) That the White Europeans and their kin worldwide are the true racial Israelites of the Bible, and 2) Who Israel’s real enemies are. To know one without the other is insufficient. To improperly identify Biblical Israel’s enemy is a criminal offense, for it can mean the difference between life and death to our people.
Death is not always so obvious to the eye. When a white marries a member of another race, it brings on death of the Spirit which was breathed into our forefather Adam. If you are ever invited to attend a wedding of a White and a nonwhite, you are not attending a wedding, but a funeral. When the 23 chromosomes of the male sperm of a nonwhite unites with the 23 chromosomes of the egg of a White, it brings death to the 23 chromosomes of the egg of the White (and the other way around). Numbers 25:1-9 (especially verse 9). In that chapter, having intercourse with non-Israelites was considered the same as “death.”
If you think the bombing of the Twin Trade Towers in New York was terrible, consider the death being brought about by miscegenation. This should give you some idea of what kind of WAR we are in, and who the players are. Now the key to understanding the WAR is found in Genesis 3:15. The anti-seedliners, by denying the truth of that passage, are aiding and abetting Israel’s worst enemy. Actually, the anti-seedliners are doing more damage than the “jews” themselves.
All this is absolutely preposterous, for there is positively no Scriptural backing for such ideas as a “law tree,” or a “grace-tree,” or that the two seeds of Genesis 3:15 are representative of the “seeds of the flesh” and “seeds of the spirit.” The term for seed in both the case of the woman and the serpent is #2233 zera, and is the same word used in Genesis 13:16 where Abram is promised by the Almighty that his “seed” would become “as the dust of the earth.”
If, in fact, Abraham had literal “seed,” so also must the serpent of Genesis 3:15 have literal “seed.” So where are the serpent’s “seed” then? You talk about “taking away,” “adding to” or “twisting,” this is the ultimate zenith of absurdity. It is obvious then, that the “woman,” the “serpent” and “Abraham” were all to have literal “seed” (Children).
Thus, to state that the “woman” was to have only one “seed” is also outrageously irrational for it dos not literally follow. She was to have a singe variety (species; like kind) of “seed” via Seth, of which one “seed” was to bruise the head of the serpent. All this makes one wonder who will be next in line to parrot this same spurious argument. Stop and think: Without the “seed” of the serpent, Chris’s heel could not be bruised; and with out bruising of His heel, we have no Redemption. Maybe one should be a tad more careful how we interpret Genesis 3:15. Repeating: If there was NOT A LITERAL GENETIC OFFSPRING of the “serpent” to bruise the “heel” of our Savior, then, WE HAVE NO REDEMPTION!!! It would appear the anti-seedliners have talked themselves into a corner from which there is no escape.
“A Murderer From The Beginning”
Again we cannot emphasize how important it is to understand the formidable enemy with whom we have to contend. In order to fathom our present WORLD PROBLEMS, it is imperative we grasp two things: (1) That the White Europeans and their kin worldwide are the True Racial Israelites of the Bible, and (2) Who Israel’s real enemies are. To know one without the other is insufficient. To improperly identify Biblical Israel’s enemy is a criminal offense, for it can mean the difference between life and death to our people.
Death is not always so obvious to the eye. When a White marries a member of another race, it being on death of the Spirit which was breathed into our forefather Adam. If you are ever invited to attend a wedding of a White and a nonwhite, you are not attending a wedding, but a funeral. When the 23 chromosomes of the male sperm of a nonwhite unites with the 23 chromosomes of the egg of a White, it brings death to the 23 chromosomes of the egg of the White (and the other way around).
This process is now happening in White countries every few minutes. In the Bible it is called a “plague,” Numbers 25:1-9 (especially verse 9). In that chapter, having intercourse with non-Israelites, was considered the same as “death.”
Speaking of Peal Harbor, it is important to understand the complete facts surrounding the 'surprise attack.' While 95% of all respondents were opposed to war in 1939, about 90% indicated they were willing to fight if directly attacked.
Operating on this information, Jewry did everything possible to goad either Germany or Italy into attacking America. However, the bait was refused as Hitler was attempting at that time to negotiate a peace with England, which was flatly rejected by the Jew lackey Churchill.
Thus Jewry's attention turned toward Japan, which had a mutual defense pact with Germany and Italy. Japan had been engaged in a war with China which FDR and the Jews tried to use as an excuse for American intervention, even though the events in Asia were of no concern to America. Jewish, not American, interests however were what concerned Roosevelt and in July 1941, he froze Japanese assets in the U.S. and embargoed trade.
This was reason enough to declare war, but Japan humbly proposed to sit down and negotiate U.S.‑Japanese differences. Instead of accepting the offer, FDR INSULTED JAPANESE AMBASSADOR NOMURA AND REFUSED TO MEET WITH PRIME MINISTER KONOYE.
As a result, Konoye and his "peace party" were replaced by General Tojo and his "war party," yet Japan continued to make peace overtures only to have them all flatly rejected. FINALLY, ON NOVEMBER 26, 1941, ROOSEVELT SENT AN ULTIMATUM TO JAPAN WHICH AMOUNTED TO A VIRTUAL DECLARATION OF WAR. This ultimatum, according to Professor Harry Elmer Barnes, was actually drafted by the Jew Harry Dexter White [Weiss] in collaboration with Jew Treasury Secretary Harry Morgenthau. It was this ultimatum, penned by two Jews, that forced Japan to attack or else 'lose face,' which to Oriental thinking is a fate worse than death. THE FINAL, SORRY EPISODE OF THIS DISGUSTING CHAIN OF EVENTS IS THAT WASHINGTON KNEW OF THE IMPENDING ATTACK ON PEARL HARBOR AT LEAST 12 HOURS BEFORE THE BLOW FELL, BUT REFUSED TO WARN MILITARY OFFICERS THERE [What other name could this be known other than TREASON]. THE U.S. HAD BEEN FOREWARNED SINCE THE JAPANESE MESSAGE CODE HAD BEEN BROKEN AND AMERICA WAS THUS ABLE TO MONITOR JAPANESE DISPATCHES. NO WORD WAS SENT TO PEARL HARBOR BY FDR AND THE JEWS AS THE MESSAGES REVEALED THAT THE ATTACK SHOULD BE CALLED OFF IF IT APPEARED THAT THE AMERICANS WERE PREPARED.
So International Jewry by going through the 'back door' had successfully ensnared America into WW II; a war that would cost millions of lives and billions of dollars. The bottom line of the war would be a world under the total subjugation of Jewry through its twin arms of Communism and Zionism. These facts have been covered up and ignored in the mass media, Charles Lindbergh, for one, recognized where the finger of proof pointed. In his "Wartime Journals," he states that 'the Jews, the Roosevelt administration, and British sympathizers combined to encourage the U.S. to enter World War II.'
Lindbergh and other patriots sought to stop Jewry's war plans by setting up the America First Committee. The committee found widespread support, but could not overcome the billions spent by Jews to brainwash the public into accepting war after Pearl Harbor. And it is Jewry which best recognized why the U.S. entered WW II.
'The American Hebrew,' in an editorial of July 24, 1942, declared that; "Whenever an American or a Filipino fell at Bataan or Corrugator or at any other of the now historic spots where MacArthur's men put up their remarkable fight, their survivors could have said with truth: The real reason that boy went to his death was because Hitler's Anti‑Semitic movement succeeded in Germany. [can you not see it? World War II was because Germany and its people were being successful in their attempts to throw off the International Jewish Bankers Rule of their country; God what does it take for America to understand?]."
The above quotation from a Jew newspaper is an admission that the U.S. entered WW II only at the behest of World Jewry; a war Jewry declared all the way back in 1933!!! Of course, this admission was intended only for consumption by a Jewish audience to keep them in the know, which tends to make it all the more revealing.
“And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baal‑peor: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel. And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel. And Moses said unto the judges of Israel, Slay ye every one his men that were joined unto Baal‑peor. And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, who were weeping before the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from among the congregation, and took a javelin in his hand; And he went after the man of Israel into the tent, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel. And those that died in the plague were twenty and four thousand.” (Numbers 25:1-9)
If you think the bombing of the Twin Trade Towers in New York was terrible, consider the deaths being brought about by miscegenation. This should give you some idea of what kind of WAR we are in, and who the players are. Now the key to understanding this WAR is found in Genesis 3:15. The anti-seedliners, by denying the truth of that passage, are aiding and abetting Israel’s worst enemy. Actually, the anti-seedliners, are doing more damage than the “Jews” themselves. They call us Two Seedliners “seedliners,” so the only thing that we can dub them is “anti-seedliners.”
“My Father” vs. “your father”
In John 8:38 is one of main supporting passages for Genesis 3:15: “I speak that which I have seen with MY FATHER: And ye do that which ye have seen with YOUR FATHER.”
You will first notice, as properly applied by the translators, the one “father” is capitalized and the other one isn’t. From this, it should be quite evident that the “Father” of the Messiah WAS NOT THE SAME “father” as that of those so-called “Jews.” Therefore, Scripture is talking about two separate genetic family trees. You might argue, “this is speaking in a ‘spiritual’ sense.” Yet, take a look at the next verse where it says: “Abraham is our father.” That hardly sounds “spiritual,” does it? It is not “spiritual” here, nor is it “spiritual” in John 8:44 where Messiah tells certain Judeans, later called “Jews,” who their father really was and is.
Further, it is stated “my Father” and “your father” indicting that our Savior had a different genetic Father than did the so-called “Jews.” The Greek word for “my” is #3450, while the word for “your” is #5216. Surely, this language should be clear enough to understand the “Pharisee” and “Sadducee” alleged “Jews” were, for the most part, definitely not of the same lineage as our Messiah. Yet, in spite of that evidence, this is what the anti-seedliners falsely maintain. They make the assertion as we have already shown you earlier; what is it that we don’t understand about the difference in the meanings of “my” and “your?” Most of them claim it is “spiritual.”
Do you fully fathom the significance of what you have just read, for if this is true about “Jewish” hermeneutics and the Kabbalah, they have wrongly interpreted, or even changed some of the meanings of the Hebrew Scriptures with their Chaldean hocus-pocus.
That this is the case is clearly demonstrated in the following:
Have you ever wondered about this verse and its seemingly contradiction to what the rest of the Scriptures say about Edom. Well many of us have. As we have said before there are approximately 27,000 transnational errors in our present Bibles. Some various translations by various translators have attempted to clean up many of these discrepancies, but the errors are very numerous and overwhelming. The translation of Deuteronomy 23:7 is one of them. I will start by quoting this passage: “Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou was a stranger in his land.”
From this verse it would appear that we should welcome all Edomites into our congregations with open arms, and with no questions asked, and that we are somehow guilty of some dire contemptible sin for even thinking an evil thought against them. I ask you: Is this not the impression which seized upon you when you read this passage for the first time? Remember the guilty, dirty, condemning feeling which overcame you for even giving the Edomites the slightest hint of disparaging thought, that possibly Yahweh might suddenly kill you in your very tracks for even blinking an eye?
If this has been your reaction when reading this passage in the past, forget it, for that is not what this verse is saying; not even remotely. I happened upon this verse many years ago when I was listening to a presentation by an Identity speaker who was making reference to the Edomites by using this verse as one of his points. At the time, I decided to look into the Hebrew meaning of the word “Edomite” for myself. I found the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance Of The Bible,” assigned the term “Edomite” the Hebrew word “130 which says: “130...Edômîy...Edôwmîy, ed-o-mee’: patronymic [derived from father’s name] from #123; an Edomite, or descendant from (or inhabitant of) Edom: Edomite. See #726 Which had the following to say: #726...Arôwmîy, ar-o-mee’; A CLERICAL ERROR FOR #130; an Edomite (as in the margin): Syrian.
At once the truth struck me (and this was about 15 years ago), for if the proper rendering was “Syrian” instead of “Edomite,” it would make all the difference in the world. Over the years, since that time, I have pointed this clerical error out to many people of our persuasion. At the time, I knew this made more sense if Deuteronomy 23:7 were to correctly read “Syrian” rather than “Edomite” for the Syrians were Abraham’s relatives, in which case this verse would read: “Thou shalt not abhor a SYRIAN: for he is thy brother, thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.”
Over the years, we have been satisfied that the word should have been Syrian instead of Edomite. We remember one party who challenged me, indicating that it was only a clerical error, and really didn’t mean anything. I finally came to the conclusion that it would be a hard proposition to prove and decided not to push the point openly any further.
That is, however, until recently, when I was preparing for this lesson, I accidentally discovered what the CLERICAL ERROR was. I will now reveal to you how I made this discovery. As I had decided to take up the topic of Esau, I was in the process of reading anything and everything I could find on the subject. I was reading along in “The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible,” volume E-J, page 24, under the subtitle Edom, when I read this: “...there are places where, because of the similarity between the letters _ (d) and _ (r), the text has wrongly read __À, ‘Aram’ (i.e. Syria), and ____À, ‘Arameans” (i.e., Syrians), for __À, ‘Edom,’ and ____À, ‘Edomites,’ such as 2 Kings 16:6; 2 Chronicles 20:2, where the KJV has followed the MT, but the RSV has followed an emended text.
“Note: I have followed the Hebrew characters as faithfully as I know how to do on my computer; I may have made a mistake...The main thing to notice here is the ‘similarity between the letters _ (d) and _ (r). You can see very readily, that a very small slip of the pen can change the word from Edomite to Samian, or Syrian to Edomite. I will enlarge these two Hebrew letters and place them side by side so you can observe the difference in them:
With this very small change in the Hebrew writing, and the word can be changed from Syrian to Edomite! Think of it this way, syRian or eDomite. By this above slight change, the Hebrew ‘r’ sound is changed to a ‘d’ sound.
Since I originally wrote this, I now realize that the small remnant of Judah from Jerusalem who went into Babylonian captivity spoke Hebrew when they went in and spoke Chaldee when they came out seventy years later.
Also, when they went in they were using a rounded style of Hebrew to write in, and when they came out they were using a square style of Hebrew. Is it possible that the changing from a rounded style to a square style produced such an error? Well, if it did, how many other mistakes are there because of this? After all, it is absurd to believe we should not “abhor an Edomite” when the Almighty hates them Himself.
“And I HATED ESAU, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, THE PEOPLE AGAINST WHOM THE LORD HATH INDIGNATION FOR EVER.” (Malachi 1:3-4)
“And Edom said unto him, Thou shalt not pass by me, lest I come out against thee with the sword...And he (Edom) said, Thou shalt not go through. And Edom came out against him with much people, and with a strong hand. Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his border: wherefore Israel turned away from him.” (Numbers 20:18-21)
[EE dum ites] descendants of Edom, or ESAU; an ancient people who were enemies of the Israelites. During the days of Abraham, the region which later became the home of the Edomites was occupied by more than one tribe of non‑Israelite peoples. When Esau moved to this region with his family and possessions, the HORITES already lived in the land Genesis 36:20.
Edom and Israel after Kadesh Barnea. After the years of wilderness wandering, Moses wanted to lead Israel northward to Canaan across Edom into Moab. The king of Edom, however, refused them passage (Numbers 20:14‑21), forcing them to bypass Edom and Moab through the desert to the east (Judges 11:17-18. Later in the journey northward to Abel Acacia Grove in the plains of Moab across from Jericho (Numbers 33:48‑49), Balaam prophesied that Israel would one day possess Edom. (Numbers 24:18).
From the Conquest Until the Division. In dividing the land of Canaan after the conquest, Joshua established Judah's border to the west of the Dead Sea and to the border of Edom (Joshua 15:1,21). During the reign of Saul, Israel fought against Edom (1 Samuel 14:47). But Edomites at times served in Saul's army (1 Samuel 21:7; 22:9).
David conquered Edom, along with a number of other adjacent countries, and stationed troops in the land (2 Samuel 8:13‑14). In later years, Solomon promoted the building of a port on the northern coast of the Red Sea in Edomite territory. He also built a smeltery nearby as a significant part of his developing copper industry. (1 Kings 9:26‑29).
After the Division. During the time of the Divided Kingdom, a number of hostile encounters occurred between the nations of Judah or Israel and Edom. During Jehoshaphat's reign, Edomites raided Judah but were turned back. (2 Chronicles 20:1, 8). An attempt to reopen the port at Ezion Geber failed (1 Kings 22:48); and the Edomites joined forces with those of Judah in Jehoshaphat's move to put down the rebellion of Mesha of Moab. (2 Kings 3:4‑5) During the reign of Joram, Edom freed herself of Judah's control (2 Kings 8:20‑22), but again came under Judah's control when Amaziah assaulted and captured Sela, their capital city. Edom became a vassal state of Assyria, beginning about 736 B. C.
Edom the Place of the Nabateans. After the downfall of Judah in 586 B. C., Edom rejoiced (Psalm 137:7). Edomites settled in southern Judah as far north as Hebron. Nabateans occupied old Edom beginning in the third century B. C., continuing their civilization well into the first century A. D. During the period from about 400‑100 B. C., Judas Maccabeus subdued the Edomites and John Hyrcanus forced them to be circumcised and then made them a part of the Jewish people. The Herod family of New Testament times was of Edomite stock.
Since no written Edomite records have been found, knowledge of the Edomites comes mainly from the Bible, archaeological excavations of their ancient cities, and references to Edom in Egyptian, Assyrian and Babylonian sources. (from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary) (Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)
E'DOMITES (e'do‑mits). The descendants of Esau, who settled in the S of Palestine and at a later period came into conflict with the Israelites (Deuteronomy 23:7); frequently called merely Edom (Numbers 20:14‑21; 24:18; Joshua 15:1; 2 Samuel 8:14); etc.)
Country. Edom ("Idumaea," KJV) was situated at the SE border of Palestine (Judges 11:17; Numbers 34:3) and was properly called the land or mountain of Seir (Genesis 36:8; 32:3; Joshua 24:4; Ezekiel 35:3, 7, 15). The country lay along the route pursued by the Israelites from Sinai to Kadesh‑barnea and thence back again to Elath (Deuteronomy 1:2; 2:1‑8), i.e., along the E side of the great valley of Arabah. On the N of Edom lay the territory of Moab, the boundary appearing to have been the "brook Zered." (Deuteronomy 2:13‑14, 18).
The physical geography of Edom is somewhat peculiar. Along the western base of the mountain range are low calcareous hills. These are succeeded by lofty masses of igneous rock, chiefly porphyry, over which lies red and variegated sandstone in irregular ridges and abrupt cliffs with deep ravines between.
The latter strata give the mountains their most striking features and remarkable colors. The average elevation of the summit is about two thousand feet above the sea. Along the eastern side runs an almost unbroken limestone ridge, a thousand feet or more higher than the other. This ridge sinks down with an easy slope into the plateau of the Arabian Desert. Although Edom is thus wild, rugged, and almost inaccessible, the deep glens and flat terraces along the mountainsides are covered with rich soil, from which trees, shrubs, and flowers now spring up luxuriantly.
People. The Edomites were descendants of Esau, or Edom, who expelled the original inhabitants, the Horites. (Deuteronomy 2:12) A statement made in Genesis 36:31) serves to fix the period of the dynasty of the eight kings. They "reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the sons of Israel;" i.e., before the time of Moses, who may be regarded as the first virtual king of Israel. (cf. Deuteronomy 33:4‑5; Exodus 18:16‑19). It would also appear that these kings were elected. The chiefs ("dukes," KJV) of the Edomites are named in (Genesis 36:40‑43) and were probably petty chiefs or sheikhs of their several clans.
History. Esau's bitter hatred toward his brother, Jacob, for fraudulently obtaining his blessing appears to have been inherited by his posterity. The Edomites peremptorily refused to permit the Israelites to pass through their land. (Numbers 20:18‑21) For a period of 400 years we hear no more of the Edomites. They were then attacked and defeated by Saul. (1 Samuel 14:47) Some forty years later David overthrew their army in the "Valley of Salt," and his general, Joab, following up the victory, destroyed nearly the whole male population (1 Kings 11:15‑16) and placed Jewish garrisons in all the strongholds of Edom. (2 Samuel 8:13‑14)
Hadad, a member of the royal family of Edom, made his escape with a few followers to Egypt, where he was kindly received by Pharaoh. After the death of David he returned and tried to excite his countrymen to rebellion against Israel, but failing in the attempt he went on to Syria, where he became one of Solomon's greatest enemies. (1 Kings 11:14‑22)
In the reign of Jehoshaphat (875 B.C.) the Edomites attempted to invade Israel in conjunction with Ammon and Moab but were miraculously destroyed in the valley of Beracah. (2 Chronicles 20:22, 26) A few years later they revolted against Jehoram, elected a king, and for half a century retained their independence. (2 Chronicles 21:8)
They were then attacked by Amaziah, and Sela, their great stronghold, was captured (2 Kings 4:7; 2 Chronicles 25:11‑12) Yet the Israelites were never again able to completely subdue them. (2 Chronicles 28:17)
WHEN NEBUCHADNEZZAR BESIEGED JERUSALEM THE EDOMITES JOINED HIM AND TOOK AN ACTIVE PART IN THE PLUNDER OF THE CITY AND slaughter OF THE ISRAELITES. THEIR CRUELTY AT THAT TIME SEEMS TO BE SPECIALLY REFERRED TO IN (Psalm 137).
IT WAS ON ACCOUNT OF THESE ACTS OF CRUELTY COMMITTED AGAINST THE ISRAELITES IN THE DAY OF THEIR CALAMITY THAT THE EDOMITES WERE SO FEARFULLY DENOUNCED BY THE LATER PROPHETS. (Isaiah 34:5‑8; 63:1‑4; Jeremiah 49:17; Lamentations 4:21; Ezekiel 25:13‑14; Amos 1:11‑12; Obadiah 8‑10, 15
On the conquest of Judah, the Edomites, probably in reward for their services during the war, were permitted to settle in southern Palestine and the whole plateau between it and Egypt; but at about the same time they were driven out of Edom proper by the Nabateans.
For more than four centuries they continued to prosper. But during the warlike rule of the Maccabees they were again completely subdued and even forced to conform to Jewish laws and rites and submit to the government of Jewish prefects.
THE EDOMITES WERE THEN INCORPORATED INTO THE JEWISH NATION, AND THE WHOLE PROVINCE WAS OFTEN TERMED BY GREEK AND ROMAN WRITERS “IDUMAEA.”
Immediately before the siege of Jerusalem by Titus, twenty thousand Idumaeans were admitted to the Holy City, which they filled with robbery and bloodshed. From this time the Edomites, as a separate people, disappear from the pages of history. Scriptural indications that they were idolaters (2 Chronicles 25:14‑15, 20) are amply confirmed and illuminated by discoveries at Petra. For a discussion of the degrading practices of Edomite religion, see George L. Robinson, The Sarcophagus of an Ancient Civilization. (bibliography: D. N. Freedman and E. F. Campbell, eds., Biblical Archaeologist Reader 2 (1964): 51‑58; T. C. Vriezen, Oudtestament Studien 14 (1965): 330‑53; N. Glueck, The Other Side of Jordan (1970); D. J. Wiseman, ed., Peoples of Old Testament Times (1973), pp. 229‑58). (from New Under's Bible Dictionary) (originally published by Moody Press of Chicago, Illinois. Copyright (C) 1988.)
Not only that, but some of the early Church fathers may have followed this system of interpretation to a small degree. Is it any wonder, then, that we have occasional difficult and questionable Bible passages to deal with. With some passages, we then have to wonder whether what we are reading is “Yahweh breathed” or is some “lying divination” by a “false scribe,” (Ezekiel 13:6; Jeremiah 14:14; Zechariah 10:2?) We are instructed in Scripture to verify everything with witnesses, so when we encounter a difficult passage, we need to consider the CONTEXT in which it is written. When we consider what we know today as so-called “Christianity,” learning that it is an admixture of Aristotelian logic, “Jewish” hermeneutics, Greek philosophy, Persian Magianism, Judaism, Platoism, Gnosticism, Eastern Mysticism, Spinozism, Maimonides-ism and Kabbalism, what should we make of all this? Do you now comprehend why we must do as our Messiah taught, and start all over from the beginning? The Scriptures truly describe our “righteousness as filthy rags.” (Isaiah 64:6)