On the Epistles of John, Part 5: The Authors of Sin

Christogenea is reader supported. If you find value in our work, please help to keep it going! See our Contact Page for more information or DONATE HERE!

  • Christogenea Internet Radio
CHR20210625-EpistlesJohn05.mp3 — Downloaded 4566 times


On the Epistles of John, Part 5: The Authors of Sin

In our last presentation in this commentary, titled The Children of Yahweh, we presented some of the Biblical evidence that those who were declared to be the children of God in the Old Testament are the exclusive beneficiaries of the Old Testament promises of forgiveness, reconciliation, mercy, salvation and redemption for Israel which are fulfilled in Christ, that Christ Himself and His apostles had declared that He had come to fulfill those same promises to those same people, and therefore also that it is those very same people who are exclusively considered to be the children of God in the New Testament. As Paul of Tarsus had attested in Romans chapter 11, “29… the gifts and calling of God are without repentance”, meaning that the promises of God did not change, and he also said in Galatians chapter 3 that no man may disannul or add to the promises of God. The New Covenant having been made exclusively with the ancient children of Israel, with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, as Paul also cited the words of Jeremiah in Hebrews chapter 8, under no circumstances may any other man from outside of the children of Israel ever legitimately claim to be a party to that covenant.

Yet from as early as the 2nd century in Samaria, which is evident in the writings of Justin Martyr and later so-called “Church Fathers”, some strange interpretation of Christianity was developed whereby it was admitted that the promises of God were for Israel, but that somehow the identity of Israel was changed. This we call “replacement theology”, it is a lie, and it has always been a lie. As Paul of Tarsus had also attested near the very end of his ministry, his labors were for the twelve tribes of Israel, for the hope of those twelve tribes, and not for some new replacement Israel, which is recorded in Acts chapter 26. A lie which has been perpetuated for over 1,800 years does not make it true. The promises of God were made to Abraham’s seed through Jacob, and Paul himself explained in Romans chapter 4 that Abraham had already become the father of many nations “according to that which was spoken”. Then he repeated what was spoken and said: “So shall thy seed be.” Other nations did not become Abraham’s seed, and Abraham himself believed that God was true when He promised that his seed would become many nations, which it did. This identification of the seed has been a shell game between Church and Jews which has been played now for over 1,800 years, and neither of them are the seed. The Word of God promised that Abraham’s actual physical seed would become many nations, and those nations can be identified in Scripture as the White Christian nations of history, which we should accept if indeed we believe the Word of God.

Here, according to the first epistle of John, it also becomes evident who those nations are, and who the Jews are, that they never have been the children of Israel in any period, that of the Old Testament or that of the New. But we must understand that John had learned these things which he is teaching from the Gospel of Christ, and not only from what has been recorded in his own account, but he also observed many of the same events and heard the same words of Christ which are recorded in the other Gospel accounts, those of Matthew, Mark and Luke. So John wrote of the enemies of Christ here, in rather simple language in chapter 2 of his epistle, that “19 They came out from us but they were not from of us. For if they were from of us, they would have abided with us, but so that they would be made manifest that they are all not from of us.”

Ostensibly, John was not learned in history and neither were the other apostles, with the exception of Paul and perhaps Luke, both of whom came to Christ after the Resurrection. In fact, we read in Acts chapter 4 where the Pharisees attempted to prevent the apostles from spreading the Gospel: “13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.” So the apostles not having been learned, we will not get a history lesson in the Gospel, and therefore from the Gospel alone we cannot learn the details of how “they came out from us but they were not from of us.” Yet the simplicity which is in Christ, of which Paul had written later, certainly informs Christians how to distinguish the wheat from the tares, and that we shall see John himself explain here in chapter 3 of this first epistle of John.

It is evident in their writings that early Samaritan and Alexandrian Christians had conceded and resigned themselves to the claims of the Jews to be Israel, and for that they departed from the Christianity of Christ and the apostles, which we would call covenant theology, and instead they had developed a novel so-called replacement theology. Many early Christians had also conceded to the claims of the Jews that they worshipped the God of the Old Testament, so they developed the so-called trinity, a concept which allows Jews and others room to claim to worship God apart from Christ. The horrifying truth is that in this manner, true Christianity has never been taught, since when the Roman Catholic Church was formed it adopted these two heresies right from the beginning, and thereby acknowledged all the claims of the Jews – the same Jews of which John had said “They came out from us but they were not from of us” and he also asked later in that same chapter “22 Who is a liar, if not he denying that Yahshua is the Christ?”

But fortunately for us, the Scriptures themselves have been preserved, and we also have some advantages which the apostles of Christ did not have, with the exception of Paul of Tarsus who was learned in history. While the apostles were simple fishermen, and they were not learned in literature, we have the testimony of Strabo of Cappadocia, that the Idumaeans were living among the Judaeans and shared the same laws and customs, so there we see a corroboration of the later histories of Josephus. Then we have the histories of Josephus which were not written until after the time of Paul, although Paul may have had access to the same original sources used by Josephus. Flavius Josephus had attested to the Edomite presence in Judaea, he had explained how the Edomites had all become Jews, and how the Edomites came to dominate politics and religion in Judaea from before the time of Christ. Paul wrote of this same thing where in Romans chapter 9 he said that “they are not all Israel, which are of Israel”, while praying only for his “kinsmen according to the flesh”, and he went on to explain those statements with a comparison of Jacob and Esau, while recounting the promises made to Jacob. So we can see the historical truth which John had put in simple language here, that the enemies of Christ “came out from us but they were not from of us.”

In the Gospel of Christ, as it is recorded in Matthew chapter 13, the apostle attested that “34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: 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.” So if there were things kept secret from the foundation of the world, we must understand that Christ had come to reveal things that are cryptic, obscure, or perhaps not even explained or mentioned in the accounts of Moses in Genesis.

Then immediately after Matthew’s attestation, and after Christ had told the multitude the parable of the wheat and the tares, we read in part: “36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Then in John’s own Gospel account, in John chapter 8, we read in part where Yahshua Christ is arguing with His adversaries, ostensibly for the sake of revealing their true nature to His Own people, and He says: “37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.” If these Judaeans were Edomites, they could claim to be Abraham’s seed, but as Paul of Tarsus also explained in Romans chapter 9, and in a different way in Galatians chapter 3, being Edomites rather than Israelites they were Abraham’s seed but they were not children of the promise. Then, ostensibly, because Esau had committed fornication (Hebrews 12:16) and had taken his wives of the Hittites (Genesis 27:46), and further mingled with the Horites throughout subsequent generations (Genesis 36:20), the Edomites were not true children neither of Abraham nor of God.

For that reason Christ continues in John chapter 8 and says: “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.” A bastard may claim a man as an ancestor, but that does not mean that the bastard is a true child. So John continued where: “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. 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.” The Jews understood what Christ meant, so they denied having been born of fornication. But Christ Himself denied them their denial, where it continues and we read: “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.” As Christ had said to them some months later, in John chapter 10, “ 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.” Incredibly, for 1,800 years Christians have believed Jews rather than Jesus, as the Jews were never His people.

Then Christ reveals the true origin of his adversaries where John continues and He said: “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.” As we have recently explained, and this is something which we have only recently realized ourselves, the last clause of John 8:44, which refers to Cain, most certainly may and perhaps even should be read “When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and his father.” Finally, for our purposes here, Christ affirms that His adversaries could not receive the truth, because they were not of God where He said: “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.

Saying this, Christ was affirming that they were indeed products of fornication, which they denied. Their denial may have been sincere, if they did not understand what fornication actually is in the eyes of God, but it is nevertheless true that they were bastards.

The tares of the world are people who were planted by the devil, and that is further revealed in the account of the fallen angels who were led by “that old serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan” in Revelation chapter 12. Where the adversary is described as “that old serpent”, we see a direct reference to the serpent of Genesis chapter 3, and by that we may understand what Christ had meant in the parable of the wheat and the tares where He described the field as the world and the tares as the children of the wicked one, the enemy having sowed them being the devil. Christ used past tense verbs throughout that parable, so He was referring to two types of people, people with two different origins, as they had already existed. Not only was Cain of the seed of the serpent, rather than of Adam, but as it says in Genesis chapter 6, “there were giants in the earth in those days”, and there is no Genesis record that God created them. But that word for giants is nephilim, which means fallen ones, and they were already in the earth in those days, before the flood of Noah, seeking to corrupt the Creation of God as the serpent had also sought to do with the seduction of Eve in Genesis chapter 3. So their presence is not accounted for until Revelation chapter 12, as Christ had come to reveal things kept secret since the foundation of the world.

In many other ways in other contexts and commentaries we have elaborated on these things, and it is not meet to attempt to prove them all here. All we should need to do as Christians, is to accept the plain meanings of the words as they were spoken by Christ and His apostles, as the apostles were not Gnostics, they were not Neoplatonic philosophers, but rather they were unlearned men who used plain language and therefore when they used terms such as seed, father, children and son, they meant them in their plain literal meanings, void of any peculiar esoteric definitions which were later imagined by the so-called “Church Fathers” who had conceded the Truth to the Jews. The portion of Matthew chapter 13 which we have cited, where Christ had said that “the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil” is not a parable. Rather, it is His explanation of the parable for His disciples, given so they could understand exactly what He had meant. Therefore the plain and literal meanings of the words must be accepted, since it is an explanation of the allegory which He had given previously, earlier in that same chapter.

Now in the opening verses of John chapter 3, the apostle had already begun to compare the children of God to those who do not do righteousness, and now he reveals the origin of the latter:

III 8 He [A has "But he"] who is creating error is from of the False Accuser, since the False Accuser errs from the beginning….

Throughout my New Testament translation, I chose to render the Greek word διάβολος literally but as a proper noun, so it is capitalized, as False Accuser, since it is a title for “that old serpent” as it is explained in Revelation chapter 12. Ostensibly, being a title for “that old serpent”, it would also be applied to all of the other fallen angels related to him, and also to their collective descendants, as they did indeed have descendants, who are often named in later Scriptures, and Devil is used in that context throughout Scripture. The fact that the Nephilim had children is also evident in Scripture, for example in Numbers chapter 13 where 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.” That word for giants is nephilim, or fallen ones, just as it is where it said in Genesis chapter 6 that “4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that,” meaning that after they committed fornication with the daughters of Adam for which Yahweh God caused the flood to come upon the earth to destroy most of the race of Adam, the exception being Noah and his family, they continued to reproduce.

So here this phrase False Accuser may have been translated as Devil. But unfortunately, where the word devil appears in the King James Version, it was used to translate both διάβολος and another word, δαίμων, or its diminutive form δαιμόνιον, which are wicked spirits and not living people. Another word which means accuser, a Substantive form of the verb κατηγορέω, was apparently used to describe the fallen angels collectively in Revelation chapter 12 where we read “ the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.” So we see a description of their nature, whereby they are portrayed as being forever opposed to the children of Israel, just as Paul had said of the Jews that they are “contrary to all men”, in his epistles to the Thessalonians.

Where John describes “he who is creating error” the King James Version has only “He that committeth sin”. But even the North American Standard Version recognizes that the meaning must be stronger than that, so it has “the one who practices sin”. In our last presentation, discussing verse 4 of this chapter, when we encountered John’s statement that “Each who is practicing wrongdoing [or sin] also practices lawlessness”, we noted that rather than simply using the verb which describes the act of sinning, John used a different verb, ποιέω, along with the noun which means sin, or as we have it here, wrongdoing, in order to distinguish someone who practices, or even creates or authors sin. So John used that same construction here, describing one who creates or authors or practices sin. The verb ποιέω, as we had cited it’s definition from the 9th edition of the Liddell & Scott Greek-English Lexicon, was used in two general senses, first to “make, produce ... create, bring into existence ... invent ... bring about, cause ... and then to “do ... practise ... to be doing, act ... operate ...”

As we have also explained, here John cannot possibly be referring to mere sinners where he says, as it is in the King James Version, “He that committeth sin is of the devil.” That is because in 1 John chapter 1 the apostle had attested that “8 If we should say that we have no guilt [or sin], we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us”, and we all would be of the devil if the interpretation offered by the King James Version is correct here. Furthermore, John would also be contradicting himself where he said in chapter 2 of this epistle “And if one should do wrong [or sin], we have an Advocate with the Father: the righteous Yahshua Christ. 2 And He is a propitiation on behalf of our errors [or sins].”

As we have also said in the past, the children of Israel had sinned throughout the history presented in the Old Testament. They sinned as soon as Moses left them alone at Sinai, by compelling Aaron to make the golden calf. They continued to sin for another 700 years until Yahweh began to divorce them and send them off into Assyrian and Babylonian captivity. They sinned throughout the period of their captivity, and they continue to sin. But in all of the Scriptures, in spite of their sin they remained the children of God, and they were never called children of the devil. In fact, in Deuteronomy chapter 32, in the Song of Moses, we read where he recollected some of the sins which the children of Israel committed in the desert, and he said: “17 They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not. 18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee. 19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.” So even having sacrificed to devils, they were nevertheless considered to be the sons and daughters of God, having been begotten by Yahweh their God. They did not become children of the devil merely by following the devil, rather they remained children of God even in spite of the fact that they forgot God who begot them.

Furthermore, where John wrote here that “the Devil sins from the beginning” he employed a present active form of the verb, and not a past tense form. So the False Accuser, or Devil, is sinning even as John was writing this epistle. But let us examine how the Devil sinned from the beginning, and how the Devil was the author of sin.

First, there is the account in Genesis chapter 3 where we see that the serpent had seduced Eve into eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. While it is not our purpose to make a full proof here, that the act being described was a sexual relation, language in that chapter certainly does establish the truth of that interpretation. These Hebrew words meaning eat and touch are used as euphemisms for sexual contact in later Scriptures, such as in Proverbs chapter 9 where Solomon describes a wanton woman who is soliciting sex and he says “14 For she sitteth at the door of her house, on a seat in the high places of the city, 15 To call passengers who go right on their ways: 16 Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither: and as for him that wanteth understanding, she saith to him, 17 Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant.” While the word for eat is not actually in that passage, the mention of bread implies the act of eating, and bread therefore stands for the idiom. Likewise he wrote of an adulterous woman in Proverbs chapter 30, where we do see the word for eat: “20 Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.” There Solomon was not referring to actual food, but the actions of the adulterous woman. In Proverbs chapter 6 we see the word for touch used as a euphemism for sexual intercourse where we read “29 So he that goeth in to his neighbour's wife; whosoever toucheth her shall not be innocent.” Again, Paul used the same euphemism in 1 Corinthians chapter 7 where he wrote: “1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

But that is not all the proof there is that Genesis 3 is a parable describing sexual relations. In the Epic of Gilgamesh there are allegories used to describe sexual relations and sexual awakening which also appear in Genesis chapter 3 in a similar context. So the language of the epic affords us an opportunity to understand the idioms of Genesis chapter 3. In an account where Gilgamesh is described as having persuaded a hunter to have a prostitute seduce the giant Enkidu into having a sexual relationship, hoping that it would weaken him, we read: “Go, my hunter, take with thee a harlot-lass. When he waters the beasts at the watering-place, She shall pull off her clothing, laying bare her ripeness. As soon as he sees her, he will draw near to her. Reject him will his beasts that grew up on his steppe!” The wild beasts had gathered to Enkidu, and they were Enkidu’s companions and evidently symbolized his power. So we see the body of the woman described in language used of the fruit of a tree, to which we may compare Genesis 3:3: “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.”

The hunter did as Gilgamesh had instructed him, and a little later in the epic we read: “The lass freed her breasts, bared her bosom, And he [Enkidu] possessed her ripeness. She was not bashful as she welcomed his ardor. She laid aside her cloth and he rested upon her. She treated him, the savage, to a woman’s task, As his love was drawn unto her. For six days and seven nights Enkidu comes forth, Mating with the lass. After he had (his) fill of her charms, He set his face toward his wild beasts. On seeing him, Enkidu, the gazelles ran off, The wild beasts of the steppe drew away from his body. Startled was Enkidu, as his body became taut, His knees were motionless – for his wild beasts had gone. Enkidu had to slacken his pace – it was not as before; But now he had [wi]sdom, [br]oader understanding. Returning, he sits at the feet of the harlot. He looks up at the face of the harlot,
His ears attentive, as the harlot speaks; [The harlot] says to him, to Enkidu: ‘Thou art [wi]se, Enkidu, art become like a god! Why with the wild creatures dost thou roam over the steppe?”

So where Enkidu was said to have first experienced a sexual relationship, it is said that “now he had wisdom, broader understanding” and that with his new wisdom that he had “become like a god”. To this we may compare the words of the serpent to Eve found in Genesis 3:5: “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” For this same reason, in Wisdom chapter 2 Solomon had writen that “Nevertheless through envy of the devil came death into the world”, and not through the envy of some literal fruit on a tree.

In the Mesopotamian legends, the father of Gilgamesh was said to be an earthly king whose name was Lugalbanda, and his mother was a supposed goddess named Ninsun. So in the Epic of Gilgamesh it is boasted that the hero is “two-thirds god”. Both Lugalbanda and Gilgamesh are listed in the inscriptions of the Sumerian kings as rulers of Uruk. As for Enkidu, who was created to counter the arrogance of Gilgamesh for which reason Gilgamesh was warned and had him seduced, he was said to have been created out of clay by Aruru, another so-called goddess. These fabulous stories actually compliment the accounts in Scripture, as they come from the perspective of satanic pagan wickedness, rather than the Godly perspective which the Scripture represents. Both Gilgamesh and Enkidu are products of the sin described in Genesis chapter 6.

The Epic of Gilgamesh was certainly extant in the time of Moses, as it was originally a Sumerian epic, it is known through archaeology to have predated the time of Abraham, and it was also found in Akkadian inscriptions which belonged to the Assyrians. Sumer was in the same land as Babylonia which had replaced it, so Gilgamesh is sometimes considered a Babylonian epic. Moses, having been educated as a prince in Egypt, must have been familiar with this epic, and the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls were also familiar with it since Gilgamesh, the king of Uruk, or Erech (Genesis 10:10) is mentioned as one of the giants in those scrolls. Two references to Gilgamesh are found in the Dead Sea Scrolls known as 4Q530 and 4Q531, which are fragments of the Book of Giants that is considered to be a part of the ancient Enoch literature, much of which was found in the Scrolls.

While the name of Gilgamesh was not found in the more recent Book of Enoch preserved in the Ethiopic language, here we are going to cite R. H. Charles’ translation of 1 Enoch in reference to this same aspect of John’s words, that “the Devil sins from the beginning”, and also that the Devil is the author of sin. We do not entirely trust the Ethiopic version of Enoch, and would not esteem it as Canon. It contains interpolations, and even entire chapters and books, which were not part of Enoch originally and which are often in conflict with our established Scriptures. But these passages from the Book of Giants, or at least passages which are very similar to these, were preserved in the Enoch literature in the Dead Sea Scrolls, for which we have a much higher regard. However they are very fragmentary and therefore we will read from Charles here, although I am also persuaded that there are interpolations even in the text of these chapters of the Ethiopic Enoch which we are about to read.

Where 1 Enoch chapter 6 begins, it is describing events which led up to the great flood of Noah which is recorded in Genesis chapter 6, so it also helps us to understand better what the ancients thought of those events which were only described in a very concise manner by Moses:

Chapter 6: 1 And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto 2 them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men 3 and beget us children.' And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not 4 indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations 5 not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' Then sware they all together and bound themselves 6 by mutual imprecations upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn 7 and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: Samlazaz, their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal, 8 Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens.

So 1 Enoch mentions these fallen angels by name, yet we cannot presume that this is the sum total of all the angels which had fallen. Furthermore, where it describes these angels as the “sons of heaven”, we would assert that where the manuscripts of the Masoretic Text, and therefore most modern Bible versions, have “sons of God” in Genesis chapter 6 in verses 2 and 4, we should amend that to “sons of heaven”. Adam was the son of God (Luke 3:38) and the Nephilim were taking his daughters. Certain manuscripts of the Septuagint, such as the Codex Alexandrinus and others attested in Origen’s Hexapla, have “angels” in those same places. Continuing with 1 Enoch,

Chapter 7: 1 And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms 2 and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. And they 3 became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells [here is one clause which we believe is an interpolation]: Who consumed 4 all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against 5 them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and 6 fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.

The fragments of the Book of Giants in the Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain references to the Biblical patriarch Jared or to Mount Hermon in Lebanon, or to the fantastic size of the giants, or nephilim, all of which things seem to be interpolations. But the general introduction of sin is ascribed to them, and miscegenation of both men and animals which is far more extensive than what is described here as mere “sin against birds, beasts and reptiles”. Nevertheless, we will continue with our citation:

Chapter 8: 1 And Azazel taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all 2 colouring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they 3 were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjaza taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, Armaros the resolving of enchantments, Baraqijal (taught) astrology, Kokabel the constellations, Ezeqeel the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiel the signs of the earth, Shamsiel the signs of the sun, and Sariel the course of the moon. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven . . .

As it is described in Genesis chapter 4, the descendants of Cain already had skill in metal-working, and were teachers of the craft, where we read: “16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod [wandering], on the east of Eden. 17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. 18 And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech. 19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. 20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. 21 And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. 22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.” So here we would assert that Cain was indeed associated with the descendants of the Nephilim, and not with the descendants of Adam who had only acquired these things some time later, ostensibly from the Nephilim who are credited with being the authors of sin. Continuing with 1 Enoch for one more chapter,

Chapter 9: 1 And then Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel looked down from heaven and saw much blood being 2 shed upon the earth, and all lawlessness being wrought upon the earth. And they said one to another: “The earth made without inhabitant cries the voice of their cryingst up to the gates of heaven. 3 And now to you, the holy ones of heaven, the souls of men make their suit, saying, ‘Bring our cause 4 before the Most High.’” And they said to the Lord of the ages: 'Lord of lords, God of gods, King of kings, and God of the ages, the throne of Thy glory (standeth) unto all the generations of the 5 ages, and Thy name holy and glorious and blessed unto all the ages! Thou hast made all things, and power over all things hast Thou: and all things are naked and open in Thy sight, and Thou seest all 6 things, and nothing can hide itself from Thee. Thou seest what Azazel hath done, who hath taught all unrighteousness on earth and revealed the eternal secrets which were (preserved) in heaven, which 7 men were striving to learn: And Semjaza, to whom Thou hast given authority to bear rule over his associates. And they have gone to the daughters of men upon the earth, and have slept with the 9 women, and have defiled themselves, and revealed to them all kinds of sins. And the women have 10 borne giants, and the whole earth has thereby been filled with blood and unrighteousness. And now, behold, the souls of those who have died are crying and making their suit to the gates of heaven, and their lamentations have ascended: and cannot cease because of the lawless deeds which are 11 wrought on the earth. And Thou knowest all things before they come to pass, and Thou seest these things and Thou dost suffer them, and Thou dost not say to us what we are to do to them in regard to these.'

Where we read “the souls of men make their suit, saying, ‘Bring our cause 4 before the Most High’”, this seems to be a reference to what is meant in the last verse of Genesis chapter 4, where the children of Adam are first mentioned: “26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.” Ostensibly, in my opinion, men began to call upon Yahweh at the time when the troubles described in the opening verses of Genesis chapter 6 had originally begun. But as for the cries of the souls of the dead, we read in a slightly different context in Revelation chapter 6 that the dead certainly can pray, where it says “9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?”

While most of these names of these fallen angels do not appear in Scripture, the name of Azazel does, however it is translated as scapegoat where it is found in Leviticus chapter 16. Perhaps it bears a meaning similar to scapegoat, but perhaps that is also why this particular angel is called Azazel in the first place. Throughout Scripture Hebrew names were titles that had purposely conveyed particular meanings. The word for scapegoat only appears four times in three verses of that chapter, so we will read it in this manner: “8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for Azazel. 9 And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD'S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. 10 But the goat, on which the lot fell for Azazel, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for Azazel into the wilderness.” Then a little further on in the chapter: “26 And he that let go the goat for Azazel shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp.”

Now, bearing this reading of Azazel from Leviticus chapter 16 in mind, we should now read from part of the very next chapter of the Book of Giants, which is chapter 10 of 1 Enoch: “And again the Lord said to Raphael: ‘Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening 5 in the desert, which is in Dudael, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may 6,7 not see light. And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire. And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the 8 Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. And the whole earth has been corrupted 9 through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin.’”

These Nephilim, or fallen angels, did not necessarily float down from heaven to seduce the daughters of men and to commit all of these other sins. As we read in Revelation chapter 12, they were already cast down from heaven, and once they were cast down, “neither was their place found any more in heaven.” Their leader having been described as “that old serpent”, they must have been cast down even before Adam was created, as the serpent and the entire tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil which he represented were already in the midst of the garden. Neither is it necessary to believed that a fall from heaven is a fall from space, or outer space, as we may now call it. Heaven in ancient times was an allegory for the seats of government and power, and the angels may have fallen from a state or position which they had enjoyed here on earth.

For this, outside of the garden we see the land of Nod, and the word for Nod, which in Hebrew means wandering, is also an allegory for sin. So Cain, being of the nature of the devil, went to the land of sin and built a city, and his children already had the skills attributed to the Nephilim where they are first mentioned in Genesis chapter 4. Therefore in Genesis chapters 3, 4 and 6 we see how the devil sowed the tares among the wheat, and we will repeat ourselves again when we discuss the rest of this 3rd chapter of John’s first epistle, and John teaches us how to separate the wheat.

But for now, to complete verse 8, since it is the devil who is the author of sin, and who had sinned from the beginning:

8… For this the Son of Yahweh has been made manifest, in order that He would do away with the works of the False Accuser.

So we read in a Messianic prophecy in Isaiah chapter 2: “3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” Ostensibly those many nations are the descendants of the children of Israel, as it goes on to say: “5 O house of Jacob, come ye, and let us walk in the light of the LORD.” There is a similar Messianic prophecy in Micah chapter 4: “3 And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.”

But the works of the Devil are much greater than merely the introduction of war and the implements of war into Adamic society.

Again, in chapter 2 of the Wisdom of Solomon we read: “23 For God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of his own eternity. 24 Nevertheless through envy of the devil came death into the world: and they that do hold of his side do find it.” The seduction of Adam and Eve and the resulting introduction of death into the world being the foremost of the works of the Devil, if Christ is to do away with them, then once again the Adamic man must be restored to immortality, to the purpose for which he was originally created. Thus we read a promise of that restoration in Genesis chapter 3: “23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 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 Cherubims, next seen atop the Ark of the Covenant, represent the keeping of the law in the Kingdom period which helped keep the way to the Tree of Life. Yahshua Christ being the True Vine, that tree represents Him and His people, who are branches on that vine. Those descendants of Adam who had clung to their own race, rather than eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, kept the commandments and they will have life in Christ. Christ being the Tree of Life, the True Vine, He foresaw Adam’s sin and planned the manner in which Adam would attain restoration from the very beginning. So both Solomon in Ecclesiastes (1:13) and Paul in Romans (8:20) had attested that Yahweh God purposely subjected man to vanity, ostensibly so that he may learn from the results of sin and rebellion.

So Paul of Tarsus had written in Romans chapter 5, where we shall paraphrase our own translation: “12 For this reason, just as by one man [Adam] sin entered into the Society, and by that sin death, and in that manner death has passed to all men, on account that all have sinned: 13 (for until the law sin was in the Society; but sin was not accounted, there not being law; 14 but death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned resembling the transgression of Adam, who is an image of the future. 15 But should not, as was the transgression, in that manner also be the favor? Indeed if in the transgression of one many die, much greater is the favor of Yahweh, and the gift in favor, which is of the one man Yahshua Christ, in which many have great advantage. 16 And not then by one having sinned is the gift? Indeed the fact is that judgment of a single one [Christ] is for condemnation, but the favor is from many transgressions into a judgment of acquittal. 17 For if in the transgression of one, death has taken reign through that one, much more is the advantage of the favor, and the gift of justice they are receiving, in life they will reign through the one, Yahshua Christ.) 18 So then, as that one transgression is for all men for a sentence of condemnation, in this manner then through one decision of judgment [that Yahweh God as Christ had to die for their reconciliation] for all men is for a judgment of life. 19 Therefore even as through the disobedience of one man the many were set down as sinners, in this manner then through the obedience of One [Christ] the many will be established as righteous.” The many are all men, meaning all of the descendants of Adam, as Paul also said, in 1 Corinthians chapter 15: “22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”

Yet even this does not encompass all of the works of the Devil. In Revelation chapter 20 there is an end of days prophecy which informs us that the Devil shall gather all nations against the Camp of the Saints, which are the children of God turned to Christ. This is a manifestation of an earlier prophecy in Revelation chapter 12 where we read that “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.” But in turn, this is also a manifestation of the curse of the serpent which we see in Genesis chapter 3 where Yahweh God tells the serpent: “15 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.” So we see why the Devil acts as he does against the seed of the woman as it is described in the Revelation.

Yahweh God had taken credit in Genesis for the creation of one race, the Adamic race. Of these, only the nations of the children of Israel have survived into the Christian era, although they may have remnants of other Adamic nations among them, as Abraham was promised that his seed would inherit the earth, and it did, for the most part, even by the time of Christ. The other Adamic nations shall certainly be in the Resurrection, as Christ and His apostles attested in various ways, but it was not their lot to be preserved on earth throughout history, a promise which was made only to the children of Israel.

So of all other nations, in Obadiah it says “15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. 16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen [or non-Israel nations] drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.” The phrase “My holy mountain” is an allegory for the children of Israel. These heathen can only be those same nations which Satan gathers against the Camp of the Saints in Revelation chapter 20. This must also be the flood which the serpent spews out of his mouth in pursuit of the woman, in Revelation chapter 12.

Throughout prophecy, it is said in diverse places that the children of Israel were going to be scattered to the ends of the earth (i.e. Deuteronomy 33:17, Isaiah 43:6), and scattered among all nations (Deuteronomy 30:3, Zechariah 7:14). So again, in Jeremiah chapter 30 we read where Yahweh addressed the children of Israel and said: “ 11 For I am with thee, saith the LORD, to save thee: though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee: but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished.” This is repeated with nearly identical words in Jeremiah 46:28.

So in agreement with Obadiah and Jeremiah, we read in the words of Christ in the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew chapter 25 that He will gather all nations, and of all nations there are only two sorts of people, sheep and goats, which are separated on sight as a shepherd would separate them. Then in their judgment, the sheep are judged for whatever good things they may have done to the sheep, and the goats are condemned for whatever good things they may have failed to do for the sheep. All sheep go to the right side, and are given entrance to the Kingdom of Heaven. But all goats go to the left side, and are cast “into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” Ostensibly, since Yahweh created only the Adamic race, and since He preserved only the children of Israel, the sheep of His pasture, then all other existing races and nations are goats, and their origin must have been with the fallen angels, as branches on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. So their destiny in the fire prepared for the devil and his angels is fitting of their origin, as Yahweh God took no credit for having created them, they must be “every plant which My heavenly Father hath not planted”, which Christ had said “shall be rooted up” in Matthew chapter 15.

When all of these things are accomplished, as they are prophesied throughout the Bible, then will Christ have done away with the works of the Devil. The Wheat are the children of God, and the Tares are indeed the children of the Devil, while all those who are not Wheat are Tares, just as there are only sheep and goats out of all the nations. The Tares cannot help but to offend, because their very presence among the sheep is sin against God as He never took credit for having created them, and therefore they must be bastards, and not sons.

Yahweh willing, we shall return soon to discuss John’s instructions for separating the wheat, which is done by the Gospel of Christ.

[Concerning Genesis chapter 3, Gilgamesh and the fallen angels, some of the things which we have said here in this presentation we have already elaborated on in the past, in two essays at Christogenea, Shemitic Idioms and Genesis Chapter Three and The Problem With Genesis 6:1-4. Others are found in a more recent essay, Identifying the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.]

CHR20210625-EpistlesJohn05.odt — Downloaded 107 times