WATCHMAN’S TEACHING LETTER
Monthly Letter #59; March, 2003 By: Teacher Clifton A. Emahiser
1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, Ohio 44830; Ph. (419)-435-2836
ISRAEL Covenant Two Seedline Racial IDENTITY
AN ANGLO-ISAAC-SON CAUCASIAN CULTURE AWARENESS TEACHING LETTER
This is my fifty-ninth monthly teaching letter and continues my fifth year of publication. I will soon complete my fifth year of publication with my sixtieth teaching letter in April. As I’m preparing this letter I have noticed the enemy is really using to his utmost his race-card, in a multicultural sense, on television. It’s simply a constant barrage of Satanic ideology. Anyone who is not aware that we are in a race-war simply hasn’t done his homework. Today the clowns called preachers in the mainstream churches are the greatest race-traitors the world has ever known, and they call it Christianity. Even some in Israel Identity avoid the use of the “R” word thinking they’re doing Yhwh a favor. Anyone who hasn’t discovered that the Bible is a book about race from the beginning to the end, doesn’t know what true Christianity is all about. Therefore today, those uninformed so-called “Christians” are trying to walk with one arm embracing Yhwh, and the other outstretched to Satan. Ditto for the “universalists” in Israel Identity, who dub it “the restitution of all things.” Until the White race is completely separated and isolated from all the other races, there will be no “restitution of all things.”
There is also another area I must address which was brought to my attention. It seems there is always someone out there going off on a tangent in Israel Identity. The latest is Pastor V. S. Herrell in his article The Sacred Name Delusion, which appeared on his Internet Web site. The object of his article was to debunk the Sacred Name of Yahweh/Yahshua. Had he really done his research on this subject, he wouldn’t have come to such an untenable conclusion. In short, he based his assertion that the Sacred Name of Yahweh/Yahshua was false on the assumption that Messiah and His Disciples spoke Greek rather than Aramaic. If you are having problems with the Sacred Name, you may find the following information informative:
(1) If you will go to Josephus’ Antiquities 20:11:2, you will find that he confesses he had problems pronouncing the Greek language. It should be obvious that in that area Aramaic was still a prominent language during that time period, and it was spoken by Yahshua and His followers, contrary to V. S. Herrell.
(2) Recently, archeologists have found what they believe to be the ossuary of James, half brother to Yahshua. On the stone box is an inscription in Aramaic mentioning Yahshua, which the translators spelled “Yeshua.”
(3) In the earlier translations of the Bible at Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8, the translators substituted the word “Jesus” rather than Joshua, showing they recognized the name to be the same. Some of the newer translations have corrected this obvious error. It should be noted that in many languages the “J” is pronounced as “Y”, making Joshua = Yahshua.
(4) In addition to these three witnesses, The Papyrus from Elephantine in Egypt written to Bagohi, governor of Judah near the time of Nehemiah, spoke of the “temple of Yahu” (abbreviated form of Yahweh) at Elephantine (The 1916 Archaeology And The Bible by George A. Barton, page 388).
Even before the writings of Moses, language was under going a “Canaanite shift.” There is evidence Yhwh might more correctly be pronounced like our state, Iowa, named after an Indian tribe. It has been discovered that the Algonquian speaking White Indian tribes actually spoke Egyptian hieratic. But until the correct pronunciation is established, I will continue to use Yahweh. (Try “Jehovah”; Ency. Britannica ,11th edition.)
As all of you know, who have been receiving my teaching letters, for the last several months we have been doing a walk through in the book of Daniel. I want to thank every one of you who have called or written informing me of the inspiration that you have received as a result of this series. At this point as we progress into this subject, we are interested in the history of Persia. This is important because the Book of Daniel fits at the end of the Babylonian Empire and at the beginning of the Persian Empire. Unless we understand the history surrounding the Book of Daniel, it is next to impossible to understand his circumstances, let alone his prophecies. With this lesson, we are going to key in on the Persian period. The object for doing this is to reckon, justify, and account for every one of Daniel’s “seventy weeks” of seven year weeks, or 490 years. Once this is accomplished, there will not be any seven years left over to project 2000 years in the future as the Futurists falsely and insanely maintain.
You will remember that in the previous lesson it was shown that in Scripture there were four different men by the name of “Darius.” If you thought that was confusing, A. Leo Oppenheim in his book Ancient Mesopotamia, on pages 340 341, lists four different men by the name of Nebuchadnezzar. The one mentioned in Daniel 2 was Nebuchadnezzar II. The last two (III & IV) were usurpers.
In the last lesson, I briefly touched on Nebuchadnezzar II when I wrote: “Another interesting factor should be mentioned concerning Nebuchadnezzar’s family line.” I will use the 1980 Collier’s Encyclopedia, volume 15, page 628, under the topic “Media” for that purpose: “... The pact between Cyaxares and Nabopolassar was sealed near Nineveh by the marriage in 613 B.C. of Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadnezzar to Cyaxares’ granddaughter ...”
It should also be pointed out that the reference in Daniel 4:1, 4, 18, 31, 33, 34 & 37 to the madness of Nebuchadnezzar refers rather to Nabonidus, whose unconventional acts as king provoked much opposition, and may well have earned him the reputation of insanity (The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol. K-Q, page 530).
To start this lesson, we will consider the various rulers of the Persian Empire. While Daniel’s time fits only the beginning of the Persian Empire, his prophecies cover all of it. To understand the Persian era is important, for it was the largest land-mass of all the empires of that early period. Rome was larger, if the Mediterranean Sea is counted. The following chart is a list of those Persian rulers:
? Cyrus 550-529 B.C.
? Cambyses II 529-522 B.C.
? Pseudo Smerdis 522-521 B.C.
? Darius I, Hystaspes 521-486 B.C.
? Xerxes I 486-464 B.C.
? Artaxerxes I 464-445 B.C.
? Artaxerxes II 445-424 B.C.
? Xerxes II, (Murdered) 424-424 B.C.
? Darius II, Ochus (not royal) 424-404 B.C.
? Artaxerxes, Mnemon 404-359 B.C.
? Artaxerxes III 359-336 B.C.
? Darius III, Codomannus 336-330 B.C.
This chart was not copied from any publication and took many research-hours to complete. Therefore, you may want to keep this chart for future reference. Later, I did find other charts on the Persian period in some publications, and the above data does not include all the usurpers.
There is another reason for understanding the history of the Persian Empire. In 2 Kings 17:6 it is recorded that the people of the Ten Northern Tribes were deported from Samaria in Palestine to “the cities of the Medes” north of Assyria. Therefore, we should find many of the Israelite tribes in that area, but by other names. As Persia conquered Media to form the great Medo-Persian empire, we should take cognizance of this fact. In other words, if we comprehend Persian history, the Ten Lost Tribes are not entirely lost to us. No wonder the enemy would want to conceal this history from us. This being so, (especially those in Israel Identity), we should acquaint ourselves with Persian history. When we look at history from this perspective, it is no longer dull and dry! Once one comes to the understanding that he is an Israelite, he will no longer have to clean the dust from his Bible! Once one comes to comprehend that many of the tribes were in the area of Persia at that time, this history comes to life. Therefore, this chart should be very interesting to anyone who is desiring Scriptural inspiration.
As long as Persia had royal blood on the throne, they continued to grow and did quite well. But when bad blood managed to infiltrate authority, things in Persia literally went to hell. On one occasion, a character claiming he was the son of Cyrus, by the name of Smerdis, was an impostor. The true Smerdis evidently died at a very young age. We can be quite sure that the phony Smerdis was not of royal blood. When Darius I was being selected for the throne, out of seven families Darius I was the only one who could qualify. To show you this, I will quote from the 1894 ninth edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, volume 18, page 580: “... He was probably the only one of the seven who was qualified to be so, for he alone belonged to the royal family, of which it is true, there may have been many members more nearly related to Cambyses. At any rate there was hardly another candidate for the crown as able as he.” This false Smerdis’s real name was Gaumata. Later another fake Smerdis appeared whose real name was Vahyazdata.
Seventy-six years later, when Artaxerxes I died, another serious problem developed. Again, I will quote from this same encyclopedia, same volume, on page 587: “Artaxerxes died in 424 [B.C.]. His successor, Xerxes II, the only one of his eighteen sons who was legitimate, was murdered after a month and a half by his brother Secydianus or Sogdianus. But after six and a half months the murderer was in his turn overthrown by his brother Ochus, satrap of Hyrcania, and in violation of solemn oaths, put to death. Ochus assumed the name of Darius ascending the throne about the beginning of the year 423.” After this, it would be downhill for Persia all the way to Alexander the Great.
While these early editions of the Encyclopedia Britannica are very informative on many subjects, nevertheless we must use them with caution. The eleventh edition put out in 1910 may be one of the greatest sources of knowledge ever assembled in one set of books. On the subject of Persia, they put things together very well. But the editor who wrote on the subject of the Book of Daniel elected to compose his contribution based on the, then, so-called pseudo-science of “higher criticism.”
One of the seeming inconsistencies he chose to use to refute the authenticity of Daniel was to point out that in Daniel 6:1 it mentions 120 satraps as compared to Herodotus’ account of 20 satraps into which Persia was divided. As you can see, there is a bit of confusion on how many satraps there were in Persia, but the enemies use these clashing accounts to discredit Scripture. It should also be noted that in Esther 1:1, 127 satraps are mentioned. Whether or not this is some kind of scribal error cannot be determined. The author of Eederman’s Dictionary Of The Bible commented very concisely:
“SATRAP Title of provincial governors in the Persian Empire (Heb., Aram. ahasdarpan; O. Per. xsaspavana; Ezra 8:36; Esth. 3:12; 9:3; Dan. 3:2-3; 6:1-7). Esth. 1:1; 8:9 reports some 127 provinces in the empire, and Daniel 6:1-2 notes 120 satraps under three presidents. Herodotus lists 20 satrapies in the empire as organized under Darius Hystapes (Hist. 3:89-94).” We do have some evidence from the Behistun inscriptions of the divisions of the Persian Empire. From the web site, http://members.ozemail.com. we read the following, page 2, line [1.6]: “Says Darius the king: These are the countries which came to me; by the grace of Auramazda I became king of them; Persia, Susiana, Babylon, Assyria, Arabia, Egypt, the (lands) which are on the sea, Sparda, Iona [Media], Armenia, Cappadocia, Parthia, Drangiana, Aria, Chorasmia, Bactria, Sogdiana, Ga(n)dara, Scythia, Sattagudia, Arachosia, Maka; in all (there are) 23 countries.”
Possibly the difference in the Biblical and secular accounts is: that Persia was divided into twenty-some countries and some 120 to 127 principal cities, with each city requiring a satrapy leader. At Daniel 6:1, it mentions “princes” rather than provinces or satrapies, and maybe therein lies the problem.
TWO SEEDLINE AT WORK IN BABYLON
Unless I explain ahead of time where we are going with this account of Daniel’s writings concerning the Babylonian and Persian periods, you will not completely understand the story. As you will begin to see, this is a very complicated period. One of the essential details which should be pointed out is the fact that the Nebuchadnezzar of Daniel chapter 4 is rather Nabonidus (also spelled Nabuna‘id or Nabu-naid). Nabonidus had gained the kingship, under Nebuchadnezzar’s name to gain political control. With unawareness to that momentous, vital, fundamental element of the story, little sense can be derived from our Bible.
Not only that, but there was a war between the factions of Nebuchadnezzar’s religion and those of Nabonidus. As we will later see, Nabonidus’s religion was that of Cain. Unless we come to an understanding of these things, we cannot comprehend what Daniel was up against in Babylon. Keep this in mind as we pursue this topic:
The following is from the 1916 edition of Archaeology And The Bible by George A. Barton, pages 54-55: “... Nabuna‘id, King of Babylon, 555-538 B.C., states that he found, in repairing the temple at Sippar (Agade), the temple-platform of Naram-Sin, son of Sargon, which no one had seen for 3,200 years. As he made this statement about 550 B.C., it was long supposed that this fixed the date of Naram-Sin at 3750 B.C., and that of his father, Sargon, at about 3800 B.C. These dates will be found in many older books, but they are incredible. They would, if true, leave long gaps in the history that we have no information to fill. Since it has been clearly proved that the dynasties overlapped, it seems that Nabuna’id reached his date by adding together the totals of dynasties, some of which were contemporary. It now seems probable that he placed Naram-Sin about 1,100 years too early.”
From the book History Of The Persian Empire by A. T, Olmstead, pages 1-2: “Nabu-naid was not the only ‘antiquarian.’ More than one of his temple restorations had been commenced, and more than one of his cult reforms initiated, by Nebuchadnezzar, who sought in vain early building records his more fortunate successor uncovered, and whose own inscriptions were purposely archaistic, imitating in style and in writing those of the famed Hammurabi.”
Page 35: “... Three days after the tablet dated by Labashi-Marduk, there is another dated by a rival, Nabu-naid. According to him, Labashi-Marduk was a youth without understanding who, contrary to the will of the gods, had seated himself upon the throne of the kingdom. There are hints of the palace revolution to which he owed his new position, of the support by nobles and army, but in very truth it was by the command of Marduk, his lord, that Nabu-naid was raised to the lordship of the land. He also claims that he is the representative of Nebuchadnezzar and Nergal-shar-usur, his predecessors. At any rate, after less than two months’ rule, the young king was put to death with horrible torture, and Nabunaid was sole ruler of the remnants of the Chaldaean Empire.”
Pages 36-37: “Although the nominee of the anti-Chaldaean party, Nabu-naid was not himself a native Babylonian. His father was a certain Nabu-balatsu-iqbi, who is called the ‘wise prince’, though actually he seems to have been the chief priest of the once famous temple of the moon-god Sin in Mesopotamian Harran ... Quite literally, it was the life-dream of Nabu-naid to restore that temple, amid whose ruins his father was still living. But this required that Harran first should be taken from the Medes ...
“In this hope, Nabu-naid made alliance with Cyrus, who [Nabu-naid] thereupon openly rebelled against Media. To fulfil his part of the agreement, Nabu-naid promptly levied an army against the ‘rebels’ who lived in the countries once held by Nebuchadnezzar. Before he left, Nabu-naid handed over the ‘kingship’ of Babylonia to his eldest son, Bel-shar-usur (Belshazzar as he is called in the book of Daniel), and started off for Harran.” [Nabu-naid used Cyrus for his own gain.]
Page 38: “... For some strange reason, Nabu-naid built there a palace like that in Babylon and took up his residence in it. Business documents from the years immediately following tell of camel caravans which carried food to the king at Tema ... The influential priests of Marduk were completely alienated. That the great lord of their city was snubbed while the alien moon-god of Harran was extravagantly honored did not lessen the resentment.”
Page 52: “After making it clear that he was the legitimate successor of their former monarchs, Cyrus made sure that the memory of Nabu-naid should be forever damned. As he tells the story, a no-account was appointed to the priesthood of the land. One like him (Belshazzar) he established over them. To Ur and the rest of the cities he gave a ritual unbefitting them. Daily he planned and made the offering to cease. The worship of Marduk, king of the gods, he [Nadu-naid] overturned; he daily manifested enmity to Marduk’s city; all Marduk’s people he brought to ruin through servitude without rest.”
Page 55: “The royal inscriptions and dedications of Nabu-naid were removed and burned; the winds carried off their ashes. They tore down his statue and erased his name from the sanctuaries. Everything he had left was fired; Cyrus fed it to the flames, for on Babylon his heart was set. As for the sinner himself, may they throw Nabu-naid into prison in the underworld, may mighty bonds inclose his assistants, while in joy Marduk regards kindly Cyrus’ own kingdom.
“The results of this deliberate propaganda were curiously mixed. Cyrus’ attempted ‘damnation of memory’ did not succeed; Nabu-naid was not forgotten. When in the next generation Babylon again revolted, two pretenders in succession claimed to be Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabu-naid ...”
While the book Sargon the Magnificent by Mrs. Sydney Bristowe, page 93 is informative, she confuses fact with fiction: “In the ‘Legend of Sargon’ he calls his adopted father ‘Akki’, which is evidently another name for the Devil, for it is closely connected with the name of Nakash the Hebrew serpent — with Ahi, the water-god and serpent — with Ahriman, who in the Persian religion is the ‘source of all evil, the devil’ — with Agni, the Indian god of fire — with the Egyptian Naka, the serpent — with Naga, the Indian serpent-god — with the Maori demiurge Tiki and with Agu or Acu, another name for the Babylonian moon-god, otherwise called Sin.”
Correctly she links “Akki”, “Devil”, “Nakash”, “serpent”, “Naka”, and the moon-god, “Sin”, but erroneously applies Sargon’s legend as fact. In The Penguin Ency. of Ancient Civilizations, ed. Arthur Cotterell, page 84, Thorkild Jacobsen explains that the enemies of Sargon characterized him as being illegitimately born of a temple prostitute priestess not knowing his father, and then being exposed to the elements to die, but rescued and adopted by a humble fruit grower. Further, the “legend” maliciously implies that Sargon was sired by the “devil.”
According to The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, volume 4, page 272, under the topic of “moon”, the moon is considered a “wanderer.”: The terms used. Yareah [yerach] is the more usual OT word for moon and possibly to be connected with the verb %9!, ‘to wander.’ since the moon travels across the heavens ...” Additionally, Wallis Budge in his Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary, page 553, explains the Egyptian word “Khensu” as meaning, “the Moon-god as the ‘traveler.’” We will remember that in Jude 13, the descendants of Cain are referred to as “wandering stars.”
The numbers in Strong’s for the moon are 3391-3394. Gesenius’ says this in part on #3392: “[Jerach], a people and region of Arabia, of a race of the Joktanites, Gen. 10:26.” Today, Joktan’s descendants are scattered among the Arabs, so we can know in what manner “the earth was divided.” And as Arabs, they have Cain’s crescent-moon as their emblem.
To show other ways Cain’s religion spread, I will now quote from The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop on page 240: “Still the Sovereign Pontiff of Rome, even after the Etruscan idolatry was absorbed into the Roman system, was only an offshoot from the grand original Babylonian system. He was a devoted worshipper of the Babylonian god; but he was not the legitimate representative of that God. The true legitimate Babylonian Pontiff had his seat beyond the bounds of the Roman empire. That seat, after the death of Belshazzar, and the expulsion of the Chaldean priesthood [sic. rather, the priests of the moon-god Sin] from Babylon by the Medo-Persian kings, was at Pergamos, where afterwards was one of the seven churches of Asia. There in consequence, for many centuries was “Satan’s seat” (Rev. ii. 13). There under favour of the deified kings of Pergamos, was his favourite abode, there was the worship of Æsculapius, under the form of the serpent, celebrated with frantic orgies and excesses, that elsewhere were kept under some measure of restraint. At first, the Roman Pontiff had no immediate connection with Pergamos and the hierarchy there; yet in course of time, the Pontificate of Rome and the Pontificate of Pergamos came to be identified. Pergamos itself became part and parcel of the Roman empire, when Attalus III, the last of its kings, at his death, left by will all his dominions to the Roman people, B.C. 133. For some time after the kingdom of Pergamos was merged in the Roman dominions, there was no one who could set himself openly and advisedly to lay claim to all the dignity inherent in the old title of the kings of Pergamos. The original powers even of the Roman Pontiffs seem to have been by that time abridged, but when Julius Cæsar, who had previously been elected Pontifex Maximus, became also, as Emperor, the supreme civil ruler of the Romans, then head of the Roman state, and head of the Roman religion, all the powers and functions of the true legitimate Babylonian Pontiff were supremely vested in him, and he found himself in a position to assert these powers. Then he seems to have laid claim to the divine dignity of Attalus, as well as the kingdom that Attalus had bequeathed to the Romans, as centring in himself; for his well-known watchword, ‘Venus Genetrix’, which meant that Venus was the mother of the Julian race, appears to have been intended to make him ‘The Son’ of the great goddess, even as the ‘Bull-horned’ Attalus had been regarded. Then, on certain occasions, in the exercise of the high pontifical office, he appeared of course in all the pomp of the Babylonian costume, as Belshazzar might have done, in robes of scarlet ... however, acting in their name and by their authority), until the reign of Gratian, who, as shown by Gibbon, was the first that refused to be arrayed in the idolatrous pontifical attire, or to act as Pontifex. Now from all this it is evident that, when, Paganism in the Roman empire was abolished, when the office of Pontifex Maximus was suppressed, and all the dignitaries of paganism were cast down from their seats of influence and power, which they had still been allowed in some measure to retain, this was not merely the casting down of the Fiery Dragon of Babylon ...”
You should have noticed from the above that the religious system that settled at Pergamos came from Babylon and was the religion of Nabonidus and his son Belshazzar. Additionally, you should have noticed that that sect was ejected out of Babylon by the Medo-Persian kings which would be no other than Cyrus and Darius I. Once we can fathom this connection, we can better grasp Revelation 2:13 which says to the church at Pergamos: “I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.”
Of the many witnesses, both Biblical and secular, to the Two Seedline doctrine of Genesis 3:15, this is but another. This overwhelming evidence shows a direct connection of the Universal Roman Catholic Church with the religion of Cain and his father, Satan. Not only that, but the so-called Protestant churches are but little offshoots of that religious system. If you’ve had problems comprehending Two Seedline teaching, this testimony should resolve any questions along that line. In my Bible these Words are in red indicating they are the very Words of Yahshua the Messiah Himself. Yet, the anti-seedliners continue to imply our Redeemer was a liar! When will we ever learn that when the Bible says “Satan”, it means Satan!, or at least something associated with Satan. Whether or not it is speaking of a literal Satan (adversary) depends on the Hebrew or Greek article, and in Revelation 2:13 the Greek article is at both mentions of Satan, or (the) Satan. It should be noted that in Matthew 16:23 and Mark 8:33 where Yahshua calls Peter “Satan”, the Greek article is not there. Additionally at Luke 4:8, when Yahshua addressed the devil as “Satan” in the KJV, it Is not found in other translations, and evidently not in the original manuscripts. But the article (the) is at verses 2, 3, 5 & 6, denoting the genuine, authentic devil. The Catholic Confraternity-Douay version correctly treats that Satan with a small “s.”
THE BACKGROUND OF CAIN’S MOON-GOD SIN
Many are taught the doctrine of “original sin” without being instructed who the original sinner was. John 8:44 and Revelation 12:7-9 clearly state that “the devil” (Satan) holds that dubious position. Adam and Eve were only victims of Satan’s rebellion. Ancients looked upon the sun and moon as two eyes in the sky; the sun was the right eye and the moon the left. The right eye (sun) was the true light while the left eye (moon) was considered inferior. We can see, therefore the moon is very befitting of Satan’s inferior position to Yahweh and his wisdom — being only a reflection of the True Light.
Using my own words, I will now present this background from three different Bible dictionaries (Insight On The Scriptures; Nelson’s Illustrated & Unger’s) under the topic “moon.” Before we start, maybe we should think over who use the moon as their religious symbol of worship today. Enough said, but they too are under the banner of Cain. It should be noted that Job lived among moon worshipers (Job 31:26-28). The Midianites were among those who placed moon-shaped ornaments on their camels (Judges 8:21, 26). Cain’s moon-god Sin was the local god of Ur, the capital of Sumer. No wonder the Almighty called Abraham out of that place, for he and his seed would have been swallowed up in Cain’s religion. From that place, Abraham and his party traveled to Haran, another major center for Cain’s moon-worship. It is also evident that Abraham’s father Terah and his brother Nahor, practiced that religion (Genesis 11:31-32). When entering Canaan, Joshua reminded the Israelites that Abraham’s kin worshipped other gods and that they were to refrain from that (Joshua 24:2, 14). While Israel was in Egypt, they witnessed the worship of the moon-god Thoth, where every full moon the Egyptians sacrificed a pig. In Greece, moon-worship came under the title Hermes Trismegistus (Hermes Trice Greatest). Moon-worship even found its way to Mexico and Central America. In Canaan, where the Israelites finally settled, moon-worship was carried on by the Canaanite tribes. Also in Canaan, the moon-god was sometimes worshipped under the symbol of the goddess Ashtoreth and her consort Baal. The worship of these two frequently ensnared the Israelites during the period of the Judges (Judges 2:13; 10:6). Considering all these things, we can begin to understand why our breaking of Yahweh’s commands became associated with Cain’s worship of the moon-god “Sin.”
When King Solomon took on foreign wives, he brought the contamination of moon-worship into Judah and Jerusalem. With his foreign wives came foreign priests making smoke sacrifices to the sun, moon and stars. This practice was continued until Josiah’s time (1 Kings 11:3-5, 33; 2 Kings 23:5, 13-14). Then came along the kike Jezebel, daughter of the kike Ethbaal, ruler of the Sidonians and married King Ahab of Israel bringing her worship of Baal which included the moon-god (1 Kings 16:31). And we shouldn’t forget Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab who attempted to kill all the heirs to the throne of David. And again, when Judean exiles came into contact with the moon-worship of Nabonidus in Babylon.
The moon was known as “Sin” in Babylon and Assyria — “Ninna” at Sumer — “Yarih” at Ugarit which last name is similar to the Hebrew word for moon. While all this was forbidden (Deuteronomy 4:19, 17:3), the evil King Manassah established the cults of “all the hosts of heaven”, including the moon, in the court of Solomon’s Temple (2 Kings 21:3-5).
Again, moon-worship was extensively practiced in the nations of the East and under a variety of aspects. Ur, Abraham’s birthplace in lower Mesopotamia, was an important center of the worship of Sin, the moon-god, as well as Haran in Upper Mesopotamia whither Abram and Terah emigrated. In Egypt the moon was honored under the form of Isis, one of the two deities commanding pagan reverence in all of Egypt. In Syria it was exemplified by one of the Ashtoroth surnamed “Karnaim”, from the horns of the crescent moon by which it was distinguished. Indications show a very early introduction into the countries adjacent to Palestine of a manner of worship distinct from any we have as yet observed, viz., honoring heavenly bodies characteristic of Sabianism (Job 31:26-27), condemned at Deuteronomy 4:19.
At a later date, however, moon-worship in a grosser form was introduced originating from Syria. An example is given in Jeremiah 7:18 and 44:16-18, 25 which says:
“The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make [crescent shape] cakes to the queen of heaven [Cain’s moon-god Sin], and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they provoke me to anger ... As for the word that thou [Jeremiah] has spoken unto us in the name of Yahweh, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven [Cain’s moon-god Sin], and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven [Cain’s moon-good Sin], and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine ... Thus saith Yahweh of the hosts of the Elohim of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven [Cain’s moon-god Sin], and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows.”