Identifying the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

Identifying the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

In Genesis chapter 2, there are two trees mentioned which Yahweh did not plant into the ground, but which were “in the midst” of the garden. These trees are actually distinguished from literal trees, where we read in verse 9: “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.” So we have all the other trees which had been purposely planted “into the ground”, but these two particular trees are merely present, and not planted in that same manner.

Perhaps the first clue to identifying these trees is found in Ezekiel chapter 31, where we see nations of men described as trees and the Word of Yahweh says “3 Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs. 4 The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high with her rivers running round about his plants, and sent out her little rivers unto all the trees of the field. 5 Therefore his height was exalted above all the trees of the field, and his boughs were multiplied, and his branches became long because of the multitude of waters, when he shot forth. 6 All the fowls of heaven made their nests in his boughs, and under his branches did all the beasts of the field bring forth their young, and under his shadow dwelt all great nations. 7 Thus was he fair in his greatness, in the length of his branches: for his root was by great waters. 8 The cedars in the garden of God could not hide him: the fir trees were not like his boughs, and the chestnut trees were not like his branches; nor any tree in the garden of God was like unto him in his beauty.”

So races and nations of men are described as trees, and in this particular allegory, as trees of different sorts. However we must be cautious in the interpretation of this verse. It is not telling us that the Assyrians had existed in the time which Genesis chapter 2 describes, simply because it refers to the “garden of God”. Wesley Swift actually made that mistake. The Assyrians are the descendants of Asshur, who is first mentioned as a son of Shem in Genesis chapter 10. Rather, Ezekiel is describing the Adamic portion of the world in the time of the Assyrians, in his own time, as the “garden of God”. At the time in which Ezekiel was writing, the Assyrians had been the most powerful nation in that world, and therefore they are described as the greatest of the trees, while the other nations are lesser trees.

An earlier, although not as elaborate, example of this is found in Genesis chapter 49, in Jacob's blessing of the tribes, where we read “22 Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches run over the wall.” Another is found in Mark chapter 8, where Christ is in Galilee and we read “22 And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto him, and besought him to touch him. 23 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 ought. 24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking. 25 After that he put his hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man clearly.” Once we see men as trees walking, from a biological perspective as racial or family trees, and we realize that these trees in the midst of the garden in Genesis must therefore represent races of men, then we shall also see clearly.

In Genesis chapter 3, an intelligent individual referred to only as a serpent is evidently acting on behalf of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil when he makes a presentation to Eve and seduces her to sin. The account is presented in a parable, in allegorical language, and its meaning has been debated throughout all time. However I would assert that once the ancient idioms are understood, as they were also used in the language and literature of other related nations with which Moses was quite familiar, then the correct interpretation becomes clear in the words of Christ in the New Testament. But men will never fully understand Genesis on its own, because by itself, Genesis is not a complete revelation of the ancient past.

In Matthew chapter 13 Yahshua Christ related the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares, describing the Wheat as the children of the Kingdom of God having been planted by God, but as soon as they were planted, an enemy had come in and planted wicked tares among the wheat. Giving that parable, Christ explained why He had spoken in parables, by professing “35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.” Ostensibly, if the things which He was describing had been “kept secret from the foundation of the world”, then He must have been describing things which happened at the time of the foundation of the world, or the Adamic Society, the same foundation which is described in Genesis chapters 2 and 3. Therefore the planting of the tares began with the seduction of Eve in Genesis chapter 3, with the presence of the devil – the serpent – and the conception of Cain along with the prophecy of enmity between two seeds, or races of men, which are that of the woman and that of the serpent.

Here there is usually an objection, that Christ alone is the seed of the woman in Genesis 3:15, but that is not at all true. Through Noah, Yahweh God had preserved eight people when He destroyed all of the other seed of the woman in the flood, and He said to Noah “9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you… ” Then much later on, in Romans chapter 9, Paul of Tarsus wrote: “7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.” Now this is more specific than the promises made to the entire race of Adam, and it is even narrower than the covenant which Yahweh made with the descendants, or the seed, of Noah. However the Bible contains a selection process, whereby the seed of the woman is constantly narrowed down until it gets to a particular point where further promises are made to one particular family of that seed, the children of Israel, as even the other sons of Abraham were excluded. However even that does not nullify the promises which Yahweh had made to the wider race of the seed of the woman in Genesis chapters 3 or 9, after the expulsion from the garden or after the flood of Noah.

In Genesis 3:15, there is a promise of enmity between two seeds, or two competing family lines, on account of the sins of Adam and Eve. That enmity first surfaced when Cain slew Abel. But there is also another objection to this in Genesis chapter 4 verse 1, where the Scripture appears to be saying that Cain was the natural son of Adam. However upon an examination of the Hebrew, it is clear that the text of that verse was corrupted at an early time. The many different Greek interpretations of the verse which are found in the Hexapla of Origen also indicate that the verse is corrupt, as do the Aramaic Targums, where there are ancient attempts to reconstruct the meaning of the passage. That evidence is in turn corroborated in apocryphal literature such as the 4th book of Maccabees and the Protevangelium of James. With all of these witnesses, the standard texts of Genesis 4:1 may indeed be challenged, and since that passage is the only place in Scripture where it may be perceived that Cain was the son of Adam, it is disqualified as being a reliable witness, especially in the face of many other witnesses which are found in the New Testament which refute the notion.

However even this is a digression from our topic, as Cain is only one aspect of this Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. But we shall continue to digress. Cain's early descendants are listed in Genesis chapter 4, and from that point they are not associated with the race of Adam, even though they survived the flood of Noah and appear as Kenites, a patronym from Cain, throughout the later Scriptures. In Genesis 3:15, there is a promise of enmity between two seeds, and Paul made an illustration using that very passage as an analogy, in Romans chapter 16 where he wrote “20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.” The Romans, descended from ancient Israelites, were indeed of the seed of the woman, and the Edomite Jews were of the seed of the serpent, as they were descended in part from ancient Kenites, Rephaim and Canaanites. Herod the Great, the Edomite king of Judaea, had attempted to kill the Christ-child as soon as He was born, and therefore he must represent the dragon held responsible for the act where that event is described in Revelation chapter 12.

So the adversaries of Christ were described in terms which directly relate them to the serpent of Genesis chapter 3. We are then told in Revelation chapter 12 that “13… when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child… 15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood… 17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” As Yahweh challenged the false gods of the ancient world, in Isaiah chapter 41, “shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come”, that is what He has done in Genesis and the Revelation, revealing what happened in the past as well as what would happen in the future. It was not Herod the great who would “make war with the remnant of her seed”, but according to early Christian writers such as Tertullian, the Jews had been responsible for the persecution of Christians for hundreds of years. They were later responsible for the Arab and Turkic invasions of Europe. Once the parties are properly identified, this history is explained as the consequence of Genesis 3:15, and as we see the enmity between two collective seeds truly has manifested itself in the world, we can fully ascertain the correct interpretation of that prophecy.

But as we have said, there is much more to the “Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil”. In Genesis chapter 6 we read, in part, “4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” We have problems with this verse as it reads in the King James Version, where it reads “sons of God” based on the Masoretic Text. Other ancient accounts of this event in apocryphal literature have “sons of heaven”, and some copies of the Septuagint have “angels”. [See The Problem With Genesis 6:1-4] Those readings are more agreeable to us, since later Scriptures inform us that these were indeed fallen angels, as Jude calls them “the angels who left their first estate” and Peter “the angels that sinned”, but even that is not our central issue here.

What we do seek to notice here is where it says “there were giants in the earth in those days” that there were already giants in the earth, for which the Hebrew word is nephilim. That word, according to Strong's Concordance, is derived from a Hebrew verb naphal, which means to fall. While the singular form nephil is often interpreted to mean a feller, as one who makes things fall, and then a bully or a giant, we would insist that it means fallen one. The nephilim of Genesis chapter 6 are the fallen ones, and their origin is not described in Scripture until Revelation chapter 12, in the words of Christ who had come to reveal things “kept secret from the foundation of the world.” This is also what was being referred to in the 2nd epistle of Peter, or in the epistle of Jude where he wrote of “6… the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, [whom] he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.”

So the account of the fallen ones, which in our Bible is only explained in the prophetic language of the Revelation, reads thus: “7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 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. 10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. 11And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. 12Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.”

As we have asserted, Genesis by itself is not a full revelation of ancient times. If it were, it would explain how the giants, or fallen ones, were already in the earth, but it does not. The serpent, the nephilim which were already present before the sin of the account in Genesis chapter 6, these were not described as a part of the Creation account of Genesis chapter 1, but they are there, and only the Revelation informs us as to how they got there. These are, collectively, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil which Yahweh did not plant, but which had been "in the midst of the garden". On account of that sin in Genesis chapter 6, Yahweh said that He would destroy the man which He had made. But He said nothing of punishing the nephilim. So He sent a flood upon the earth which destroyed all but eight of the descendants of Adam, having preserved Noah and his sons and their wives. After the flood, a table of nations is listed, showing which nations had descended from the sons of Noah.

But before we proceed from there, we must first discuss another important aspect of the events described in Genesis chapter 6. In chapter 3 of his first epistle, the apostle John informs us that “4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” Then Paul of Tarsus, speaking of the law given at Sinai, said in Romans chapter 5, “For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.” Paul, saying this, was speaking of the law of Moses explicitly, and of course men must have sinned in many ways other than that which is described in Genesis chapters 3 and 6, but those sins were not imputed, there being no law. For that reason, not even Cain could be executed for having murdered Abel.

But Adam and Eve were punished, and several generations later, except for the eight who were saved, all of the descendants of Adam and Eve were punished once again in the flood. So what law did they transgress that necessitated their punishment, if the law at Sinai had not yet been given? While there was no law such as what Moses had been given at Sinai, and therefore Paul is not wrong, there was one law, and that is what they had all transgressed. Breaking that one law brought punishment upon the entire Adamic race in the days of Noah, and it certainly is described in Genesis chapter 6. That law is the same law which Adam transgressed, and it was given to Adam in Genesis chapter 2: “16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 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.” So if the Adamic men of Genesis chapter 6 were punished for their sin, it must have been for this law which they had broken, as it was the only law that Adam was given, and that also proves the substance of the sin in Genesis chapter 3 was the same as that of chapter 6.

The only transgression for which the men of Genesis chapter 6 may have justly been punished is the transgression of this single law given by Yahweh to their first father, Adam. Therefore the race-mixing event of Genesis chapter 6 was the act of eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and it was the same sin which Eve had committed, and which Adam accepted, for which they themselves had been punished much earlier. Therefore we make the assertion that the punishment upon the men of Genesis chapter 6 being for race-mixing with the Nephilim, the fallen ones, proves that the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is indeed a race of people, which are also the devil and his angels, because the admonition against eating from that tree was the only law given which the descendants of Adam could have transgressed. Yahweh God is not unjust, destroying men for things that they could not have known were wrong. But He did tell Adam that one thing was wrong, and that is how both Adam and Eve and their Genesis 6 descendants had transgressed.

Returning to Genesis chapter 10, we are given a list of nations which had descended from the sons of Noah and their wives, in fulfillment of the blessing which he had received, where it says in Genesis chapter 9: “1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” In Genesis chapter 11 the resulting nations are divided from one another, and spread throughout the land. Along with the Scriptures, later history and modern archaeology help us to establish the fact that these nations are the White nations of the ancient world, which had spread from the Indus river valley north to Tibet, and west through the coasts of southern Europe and northern Africa. However the resulting White civilization created by these nations remained centered in and around Mesopotamia, the Levant and Egypt for many centuries.

But in Genesis chapter 14, we see a mention of several tribes that are not listed in Genesis chapter 10, which are Zuzims, Emims and Rephaims. There we read: “5 And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim, 6 And the Horites in their mount Seir, unto Elparan, which is by the wilderness.” We will drop the redundant letter ‘s’ as these words are all plural in their Hebrew form, Zuzim, Emim and Rephaim. Chedorlaomer was described as the “king of Elam”, an Adamic nation which was descended from Shem and which is known in later history as Persia.

So if the Zuzim, Emim and Rephaim are not listed in Genesis chapter 10, if they are not mentioned among the sons of Noah, then who are they? And if all men descended from Noah, why is it even important that we are provided with the Genesis chapter 10 genealogy? But if there are men present who did not descend from Noah, then it certainly is important, and we were provided with this information because it does matter, so that we are able to make certain distinctions.

In the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon, the word Zuzim is defined as “‘roving creatures’ 1) an ancient people of uncertain origin, perhaps, inhabitants of ancient Ammon east of the Jordan.” We would assert that if they had descended from Noah, then their origin would not be listed as “uncertain”. We would further assert that Yahweh did not create any supposed people who were called only “roving creatures”, not even having a proper name of their own. Likewise, the word Emim is defined in that same lexicon as “‘terrors’ 1) ancient inhabitants of Moab”, but of course at this early time there were not yet any Moabites. Like the Zuzim, the Emim have no proper name, and are not found in the genealogy of the race of Adam given in Genesis chapter 10. Then there are the Rephaim, and that word means “giants, Rephaim 1a) old race of giants”, and they are certainly not listed in Genesis chapter 10.

Because of the sin of Ham, Noah’s son, Noah had cursed one of the sons of Ham, which was Canaan. Apparently, having been cursed, Canaan was also shunned by his Adamic brethren. So in Genesis chapter 15 we see the various tribes of the Canaanites, the descendants of Canaan, dwelling in the midst of alien peoples. Where Abraham was being informed that his descendants, or seed, would replace these people, there in that chapter we read “18 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: 19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, 20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, 21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.” Of this list of ten tribal groups, the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites and Jebusites were all said to have been descended from the Canaanites in Genesis chapter 10. Although here in Genesis chapter 15 they were called by their own more specific names, Canaanites are also mentioned separately, it being evident that not all of the Canaanites had acquired more specific names.

But the Kenites, the word being used to describe a tribe here and not an occupation, are the descendants of Cain, and here we also see the Rephaim once again, while the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites and the Perizzites are not listed in Genesis chapter 10, and therefore they are also of obscure origins. The Hebrew lexicon found in the original Strong’s Concordance states that the word Kenite is a patronym from the name of Cain and defines it as: “a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin”, and in turn it defines Kajin as “the name of the first child”, referring to the Cain of Genesis chapter 4, and “of an oriental tribe”, which could only be those Kenites listed in Genesis chapter 4, the descendants of Cain, and they must be these Kenites of Genesis chapter 15. Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon also connects the name of Cain to the tribe of the Kenites.

Later, in the Gospel, Christ tells His adversaries that they were indeed descended from Cain, where in John chapter 8 He says “44 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.” Only Cain was a “murderer from the beginning”, and a clear historical connection exists in Scripture from the Kenites to the Canaanites with whom they mingled, to the Edomites descended from Esau and his Canaanite wives and down to the Idumaeans in Judaea at the time of Christ. In Matthew chapter 23, and in Luke chapter 11, Christ had also related His adversaries to Cain by informing then that they would be held responsible for the blood of Abel, something for which only the posterity of Cain could be liable. Since Seth was not yet born, no descendant of Seth could be held liable for the blood of Abel.

As for the Rephaim, in 1 Samuel chapter 17, David becomes renowned for having killed Goliath, the giant, “whose height was six cubits and a span.” By the shortest estimate of the length of a cubit, which is 18 inches, Goliath was about 9 feet and 4 inches tall. But Goliath was not an anomaly. As we may see in 2 Samuel chapter 21, he was from an entire family of such giants, where we read: “ 16 And Ishbibenob, which was of the sons of the giant, the weight of whose spear weighed three hundred shekels of brass in weight, he being girded with a new sword, thought to have slain David. 17 But Abishai the son of Zeruiah succoured him, and smote the Philistine, and killed him. Then the men of David sware unto him, saying, Thou shalt go no more out with us to battle, that thou quench not the light of Israel. 18 And it came to pass after this, that there was again a battle with the Philistines at Gob: then Sibbechai the Hushathite slew Saph, which was of the sons of the giant. 19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. 20 And there was yet a battle in Gath, where was a man of great stature, that had on every hand six fingers, and on every foot six toes, four and twenty in number; and he also was born to the giant. 21 And when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea the brother of David slew him. 22 These four were born to the giant in Gath, and fell by the hand of David, and by the hand of his servants.”

The word for giant in those passages in 1 and 2 Samuel is rapha’ or raphah, of which the plural form is sometimes left untranslated, as Rephaim. But there were other giants besides the family of Goliath. One of them was Og of Bashan, and another is Anak, the father of the Anakim. Then in Deuteronomy chapter 2 we have a revelation of the identity of those Genesis chapter 14 Emim, where we read in a description of the land of Moab that “10 The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; 11 Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims.” The word for giants in that passage is also Rephaim. Further on in the chapter it is Rephaim once again where we read of the land of Ammon: “20 (That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims; 21 A people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; but the LORD destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead….”

Then in Numbers chapter 13, in the report on the land of Canaan given to Moses by the spies, we read: “33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.” But the word for giants in that passage is not Rephaim. Rather, it is Nephilim, or fallen ones, the same word which appears in Genesis chapter 6. This directly relates the giants of the land of Canaan to the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil from which the descendants of Adam were eating in the days of Noah, and ostensibly, the Canaanites and others were still eating of that tree. While the Rephaim were of the Nephilim, ostensibly not all of the Nephilim were Rephaim, or giants. It should be no wonder, that Yahweh commanded that the children of Israel destroy all of the Canaanites, and that Esau could never recover his birthright. But the giants did not confine themselves to Palestine. The ancient legends of Mesopotamia also described giants, such as Gilgamesh and Enkidu, giants which ruled over their cities and were offspring of their gods. The Greeks also had such legends, as the battles between the gods and the Titans.

In the 6th century before Christ, the Edomites had moved north into the lands of Israel and Judah which in large degree were left vacant by the Assyrian and Babylonian deportations. After the people of Judah who returned to Jerusalem had established themselves and developed a formidable military, they began to forcibly convert the Edomites and other aliens in Judaea to the practice of Judaism, a process which took several decades to complete. By the time of the ministry of Christ, those Edomites had in turn become the dominant element of the population, and under the Romans and the Herodians they held the positions of authority in the local government. Having all of the status of Judaeans in Judaea, they had been intermarrying with the Israelites of Judaea for over 150 years by the time that John the Baptist began to announce, as it is recorded in Matthew chapter 3 “10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: 12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

Of course, John was not speaking in reference to fruit trees, or even to wheat. Rather, he was speaking allegorically in reference to trees as races of people. The axe would be laid to their roots because from their very beginning, entire trees could not bear any good fruit. For that reason, Christ had also said, as it is found in Matthew chapter 15, “13… Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” Going back to those trees in the garden, in Genesis chapter 2 we have seen that there were only two trees present which Yahweh God did not plant into the ground: the Tree of Life, and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Properly identifying these trees permits us to understand what it is that He intends to root up, what it is which He did not plant.

In Genesis chapter 3, after the punishment of Adam for the transgression in Eden was announced by Yahweh, we read: “22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.” So if the man eats from the Tree of Life, he may have eternal life, but in the meantime he will die. As part of his punishment, Adam was told in that same chapter that “19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.”

Later, in the gospel of John, in chapter 6, Yahshua Christ said “47 Truly, truly I say to you, he believing in Me has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life!” Then later on, in John chapter 15, the meaning of the phrase “tree of life” becomes evident, where Christ is recorded as having said: “1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman…. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.”

While in the beginning there were two trees which were in the midst of the garden of God, in chapter 22 of the Revelation, at the very end, there is only one of those two trees remaining, where we read in the description of the City of God that “2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.”

As we have often said, for example in our recent presentation On the Gospel of John, Part 18: The Parable of the Bread of Life:

Going back to Genesis chapter 3, after the punishment of the man was pronounced, we read: “24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” The next time the cherubim are seen, they are atop the ark of the covenant, on either side of the mercy seat. Contrary to Church teachings, the cherubim did not prevent or block the path to the Tree of Life, but rather, the cherubim were symbolic of the preservation of the path to the Tree of Life, so that man could ultimately find it through Christ. It is upon the ark that Yahweh appeared in judgment amidst the cherubim, and the tablets of the law were inside, along with Aaron’s rod and the golden pot of manna. Therefore it should be manifest, that the tablets of the law represented the “way of the tree of life”, and those other things were reminders of the early history of Israel and their promises to keep the law. Solomon had written in Proverbs chapter 3 concerning that Wisdom which comes from Yahweh and said “17 Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace. 18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retaineth her.” While the children of Israel could not keep the law, the law preserved Israel sufficiently to the point of the appearance of the Messiah, who is the Tree of Life, and in that respect, the manna was also a type for Him. With Him is the Bread of Life, He is the firstfruits of the Tree of Life, and the children of Israel must eat from it in order to live forever, as it was promised to the first man Adam at the fall, that if he “take also of the tree of life, and eat,” that he would be restored. The obedient branches are those which remain on the vine.

So a little further on in Revelation chapter 22, we see a confirmation of this interpretation, where it says: “14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” The gates of the city, as they are described in Revelation chapter 21, are labelled with the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel. So if they are pure, meaning that their ancestors clung to the Tree of Life and kept the law of God, meaning that they are sons and not bastards, then they can enter into the City of God. Evidently, the Tree of Life represents God Himself, Christ, and His Adamic race, out of which the children of Israel were chosen to inherit the earth. This, for example, we see in Isaiah chapter 27: “6 He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit.”

If the Tree of Life represents a race of people, which is something that we do not learn without the Revelation and parables of Christ, and if the law of God is the way to the Tree of Life, then the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is also a race, or even perceived races of people, and existing contrary to that law they shall be rooted up, because they were not planted by Yahweh. For this same reason, Christ had also said, as it is recorded in Matthew chapter 7, “15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” The fruit does not have a choice, to be good or evil, it is good or evil only by the tree from which it comes.

This too, must be a reference to people, as it relates to false prophets, to wolves in sheep’s clothing, and we read in Jude “4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” Men who “crept in unawares” and “who were before of old ordained to this condemnation” could not have originated with the Tree of Life, and therefore they were not planted by Yahweh. However we know it is a reference to people where in Matthew chapter 7 Christ continued in that same place and said: “ 21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

Christ had told Nicodemus, in John chapter 3, that “3… Truly, truly I say to you, unless a man should be born from above, he is not able to see the Kingdom of Yahweh.” Then later, in John chapter 8, He told His adversaries “You are from of those below; I am from of those above. You are from of this Society; I am not from of this Society.” Being “from of those below” we may infer that there is a greater number of people who are not “born from above”, and who shall therefore never see the Kingdom of God. Shortly thereafter, in that same conversation recorded in John chapter 8, He said to them “37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.” But admitting that His adversaries were Abraham’s descendants does not admit that they are Israelites, as the population of Judaea contained as many – if not an even greater number – of Edomites, and Abraham also had other sons.

Therefore, as Christ continued, He denied them their claim that God is their Father: “38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. 39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.” Being Abraham’s seed does not make them Abraham’s children if they are bastards, and if they are Edomites, they certainly are bastards. Then as Christ further continued, His adversaries had denied being bastards, which shows that they knew precisely what He had meant: “41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. 42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. 43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.”

This very event was prophesied in Malachi chapter 2, where the prophet is evidently speaking of Judaea itself, and using the sin of Judah as a type for what would become of Judaea. There Yahweh is chastising the priests for having “corrupted the covenant of Levi”, and they are depicted as answering the charge by saying “10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?” Then Yahweh answered them: “11 Judah hath dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah hath profaned the holiness of the LORD which he loved, and hath married the daughter of a strange god.” In Genesis, Judah had “married the daughter of a stranger god” when he took a wife of the Canaanites, and his sons were rejected, only one of them being spared. But Yahweh had mercy on Judah, ostensibly for Jacob his father’s sake, and, through the situation with Tamar, Judah eventually had legitimate offspring in Pharez and Zarah, who inherited the blessings.

But Esau, who also took wives of the Canaanites, had no such mercy, and for that all of his offspring were accursed. Later, in reference to this same situation in Judaea, writing in Romans chapter 9 Paul explained the reasons for the rejection of Christ in Judaea by making a comparison of Jacob and Esau, and explaining that the Israelites are vessels of mercy, while the Edomites are vessels of destruction. He explained this in relation to his testimony that he prayed only for those of his own kin, since they were not all Israelites who were in Israel. The historical records in Josephus and Strabo attest that many of the people were indeed Edomites. Paul said those things in the same epistle where he had also told the Romans, in a prayerful salutation in chapter 16, “20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.” However many of the Edomites had survived the destruction of Jerusalem which followed soon after, and throughout history many of their descendants are known as Jews. As Christ had told His adversaries, in John chapter 10, “26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.”

Satan, that old serpent, the dragon, the devil, these labels are all employed in Scripture as collective terms describing the enemies of God, whose origin is in turn described in chapter 12 of the Revelation of Yahshua Christ. Genesis chapter 3 being a parable describing a sexual transgression, Cain was a son of the devil. For that reason Christ called him a devil, as that was his origin. There having been only one law, the transgression of Genesis chapter 3 must have been the same as the transgression of Genesis chapter 6, but described in different terms. So, returning to John chapter 8, Christ then told those who opposed Him: “44 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. 45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. 46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? 47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.” If Cain were truly the son of Adam, then Cain could not have been a devil, as a good tree cannot produce bad fruit. But Adam, having accepted Eve in her sin, also sinned himself, and accepted Cain as his lawful son while Cain was not his natural son. For that reason Cain’s sacrifice could not be accepted, and Yahweh challenged him to do well while knowing that he could not do well, as the sin which “lieth at the door” was the very circumstances of his birth. For that reason also, a devil could lay claim to all the kingdoms of the world, something which was supposed to belong to Adam, as it is illustrated in the gospel in Matthew chapter 4, and in Luke chapter 4.

While the Bible itself does not inform us as to the reason for the rebellion of the angels, which is the evident source of the Nephilim and other corrupted peoples of both the ancient and modern worlds, in the Enoch literature we do have an indication as to the nature of their rebellion, or at least, the action of the rebels in its aftermath. The apostles themselves had quoted or alluded to things found in the writings attributed to Enoch, however we cannot be certain that what we know as 1 Enoch is what they were citing, as that work is replete with additions and interpolations. But the Enoch literature from the Dead Sea Scrolls, which was contemporary to the time of the apostles, may be more worthy of our consideration.

With that in mind, in our commentary on Luke chapter 4, presented here in June of 2012, I wrote the following:

From a translation of the Qumran scrolls, The Dead Sea Scrolls, A New Translation by Michael Wise, Martin Abegg Jr. and Edward Cook, on page 247, a translation of 1Q23, fragments 1 and 6, which are unfortunately highly fragmented: “1 [... two hundred] 2 donkeys, two hundred asses, two hund[red ... rams of the] 3 flock, two hundred goats, two hundred [... beast of the] 4 field from every animal, from every [bird ...] 5 [...] for miscegenation [...]”. And in the same source, 4Q531, fragment 2: “1 [...] they defiled [...] 2 [... they begot] giants and monsters [...] 3 [...] they begot, and, behold, all [the earth was corrupted ...] 4 [...] with its blood and by the hand of [...] 5 [giants] which did not suffice for them and [...] 6 [...] and they were seeking to devour many […] 7 [...] 8 the monsters attacked it.” Again, 4Q532, Col. 2 fragments 1-6: “2 [...] flesh [...] 3 al[l ...] monsters [...] will be [...] 4 [...] they would arise [...] lacking in true knowledge [...] because [...] 5 [...] the earth [grew corrupt ...] mighty [...] 6 [...] they were considering [...] 7 [...] from the angels upon [...] 8 [...] in the end it will perish and die [...] 9 [...] they caused great corruption in the [earth ...] 10 [... this did not] suffice to [...] 11 they will be [...]”.

While they are quite fragmentary, the general theme of these fragments from what is known as the Book of Giants is readily evident. A very similar version of what is related here is found in [R.H. Charles’ edition of] 1 Enoch, i.e. chapters 86 and 88. It is highly probable that accounts such as these were the inspiration for the ancient chimera myths of both Greek and Near East mythology. The offspring which resulted from the unions of diverse species are later called bastards, for instance in the Dead Sea Scroll labelled as 4Q204 which is reckoned among the Enoch literature, and their extermination is forecast where it says “Exterminate all the spirits of the bastards and the sons of the Watchers”, which seems to have been speaking prophetically and is speaking of the offspring of the fallen angels. In the end there are sheep, and everything else is a goat destined for the Lake of Fire where are Hell and Death and the False Prophet.

I had cited this same passage again in a presentation made here in November of 2018, based on one of Clifton Emahiser’s papers and titled Identifying the Biblical “Beast of the Field”, Part 7. Then I added supporting evidence from an early Christian writer, Justin Martyr, who wrote in the middle of the 2nd century, perhaps a hundred and thirty years after the Resurrection of the Christ. In that I said the following, where Justin Martyr is cited at length:

With this, [the] early Christian writer Justin Martyr agreed, but it is not something which is found in the Greek philosophy that he also followed. This is evident in the Second Apology of Justin:

Chapter V.—How the Angels Transgressed.

But if this idea take possession of some one, that if we acknowledge God as our helper, we should not, as we say, be oppressed and persecuted by the wicked; this, too, I will solve. God, when He had made the whole world, and subjected things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruits and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law – for these things also He evidently made for man – committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and the punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they were enslaved by lustful passions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness. Whence also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that it was the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them that did these things to men, and women, and cities, and nations, which they related, [the poets] ascribed them to god himself, and to those who were accounted to be his very offspring, and to the offspring of those who were called his brother), Neptune and Pluto, and to the children again of these their offspring. For whatever name each of the angels had given to himself and his children, by that name they called them.

Here it is evident that to Justin, demons are men born among us who were the result of the unions between women and the so-called “fallen angels”, but there is more. From The Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew, from Chapter 4 which was titled The Soul of Itself Cannot See God:

[Trypho:] “‘And what do those suffer who are judged to be unworthy of this spectacle? ’said he.

[Justin:] “‘They are imprisoned in the bodies of certain wild beasts, and this is their punishment.’

[Trypho:] “‘Do they know, then, that it is for this reason they are in such forms, and that they have committed some sin? ’

[Justin:] “‘I do not think so.’

[Trypho:] “‘Then these reap no advantage from their punishment, as it seems: moreover, I would say that they are not punished unless they are conscious of the punishment.’

[Justin:] “‘No indeed.’

[Trypho:] “‘Therefore souls neither see God nor transmigrate into other bodies; for they would know that so they are punished, and they would be afraid to commit even the most trivial sin afterwards. But that they can perceive that God exists, and that righteousness and piety are honourable, I also quite agree with you, ’said he.

[Justin:] “‘You are right,’ I replied.

So, according to Justin Martyr, not only are demons people, but evil spirits are locked in the bodies of wild beasts, who are also evidently people, as the apostles Peter and Jude both described those infiltrators among us as “natural brute beasts”. With this aspect of Justin’s teachings, which is certainly Christian and Biblical, we wholeheartedly agree. However the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Church, which claim to be founded on the so-called Church Fathers, did not at all follow any of the early church fathers, so they imagine that beasts can be people, and then they attempt to make Christians out of devils, contrary to the teachings of Christ. Even before they started, the “Catholic” and “Orthodox” churches were cucked by the Jews, by Satan himself.

One other aspect of this conversation which I have not addressed in the past is that Justin Martyr seems to have taken it for granted, that Trypho, who was evidently a demon, was correct where he assumed that the demons were being punished for their correction. Yet the apostles inform us that the demons are bound in chains of darkness awaiting their destruction on the great day of the wrath of Yahweh. So they are not going to be corrected, and rather, they are going to be destroyed. Until that time, Yahweh employs the demons in the chastisement of His children, correcting them for the error of rebellion against their God. For that reason Paul wrote in Hebrews: “8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.” The bastards, who all face certain destruction, have no need of chastisement for correction.

Here we will take these revelations from Enoch and Justin Martyr one step further. In Genesis chapter 2 there is an example where shortly after the creation of Adam, and before Eve was created, Yahweh presents him with every sort of animal, which he names, and a point is made that none of them would make for Adam a suitable mate. So we read: “16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 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.” As soon as Adam is created, the “Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil” was already in the garden, but the nature of that tree is not fully revealed until the advent of the Messiah. This is the law which was given to Adam which he transgressed, and for which he was later punished. This must also be the law which his descendants had transgressed, as is evident in Genesis chapter 6, for which they were also punished, and by that we know the nature of both transgressions.

Then the account in Genesis chapter 2 continues: “18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.” Once we learn from the Enoch literature what was the sin of the fallen angels, we can see that this event between Yahweh, Adam and the animals which He created presents an anti-thesis answering the sin of the fallen angels. Admittedly, Justin Martyr seems not to have fully understood this, although he did indeed express the result of it where he said that the angels that sinned “are imprisoned in the bodies of certain wild beasts, and this is their punishment.” Such is the nature of the non-Adamic races: they are branches on that family tree, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. For that reason, they share the same fate as the devil and his angels.

The children of Israel are the sheep of Yahweh’s pasture, and Christ came only to save those same “lost sheep”, as the Scriptures proclaim rather clearly. In the parables of Christ, all other peoples are said to be goats, and not sheep. From the parable of the sheep and the goats found in Matthew chapter 25, we read: “31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.” So nations are distinguished as being one of two types, either sheep or goats, and they are separated on sight, by their appearance, as a shepherd would separate his flocks. None of the sheep are put with goats for reason of their behavior, and none of the goats are put with the sheep because of their behavior. A naughty sheep does not somehow become a goat, and a well-behaved goat can never be a sheep.

Reading further: “34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” The sheep are all judged to be good, evidently because they had generally followed the will of God, by caring at one time or another for their fellow sheep. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit. None of the sheep are singled out to share in the fate of the goats.

Continuing with the parable in that respect: “41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” The goats share the same fate as the “devil and his angels”, for which reason we are persuaded that is because they had actually originated with the “devil and his angels”, although there has been much other confusion along the way. These must be branches from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, because first, there is no explicit record of Yahweh God having created any people other than Adam, meaning the race of Adam, and second, because there is no good fruit among them, and a good tree cannot produce bad fruit. There being only two trees in the garden which represent people, these goat nations cannot be of the Tree of Life because a good tree cannot produce bad fruit, and good fruit will not be cast into the fire. As Paul explained in chapter 12 of his epistle to the Hebrews, one is either a son or a bastard, and there is no third choice. The bastards, as we have seen from Enoch, had originated with the corruptions of the fallen angels.

After the murder of Abel, when Cain was expelled from the garden, he went and found a wife and built a city, and this was in the “land of Nod”, as we see in Genesis 4:16-17. The word Nod means wandering. And wandering is often a metaphor for sin, for example in the 56th Psalm where we read: “8 Thou tellest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book?” So we see that there were other people in the land of wandering, and everything outside of what was created in the garden by God was already in a state of sin. Yahweh God created the Adamic man and He created beasts, but He did not create the bastards. Therefore the apostle John told his readers in his first epistle “19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.” Ostensibly, John was speaking only to “lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

Now we see the reason for the rejection of the goats: “42 For I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?” There might be an objection, that the people of other races, the “goat nations”, do have empathy for and care for one another. But that is not why they are condemned here. The next verse shows that they are condemned not for how they treat other goats, but for how they treated the sheep: “45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.” So He concludes: “46 And these [the goats] shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous [the sheep] into life eternal.”

In the parable of the net, in Matthew chapter 13, we read: “47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: 48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. 49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, 50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” That word for kind is γένος, which is race. In the end, the bad kind is not thrown back into the sea, but is destroyed in the Lake of Fire. However none of the kinds which were created by Yahweh in Genesis were “bad”, so this must also be describing those same corruptions of His Creation.

From the beginning, Yahweh having demanded that His sheep be a separate and peculiar people, the goats are damned if they do, and they are damned if they don’t. By presenting themselves among the children of Israel, they are already transgressing. They have the same destiny as the “devil and his angels”, and they cannot escape it because that is from where they originated, in the corruptions of the devil and his angels. So in the end, the entire Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is destined for the lake of fire, and there is only one tree left, which is the Tree of Life. That is our White Adamic race.