Keith Hunt - Satan's Seed - Physical Humans? #1 - Page One   Restitution of All Things
  Home Next Page

Satan's Seed - Physical Humans? #1

Did Satan produce physical people?


The "Seed of Satan" Does the Devil Have Offspring on This Earth?
A growing movement in this country is spewing out virulent hatred
against certain ethnic and racial groups-particularly the Jews
claiming that they are the lineal descendants of the serpentine
creature who appeared to Eve in the Garden of Eden. Perhaps you
have heard of this "seedline" teaching. If so, it is past time
you saw the TRUTH about this hate-mongering doctrine!

by Vance A. Stinson

It's shocking but true! There are "ministers" right here in the
United States of America who hold high the banner bearing the
name of Jesus Christ, and, at the same time, propagate a venomous
doctrine of hatred not unlike the one espoused by Adolph Hitler
and his band of hate-mongering madmen! The Jew, they say, is the
spiteful enemy of all that is good, right, decent, and Christian.
Many of these preachers claim that the Jews of today are
descendants of Cain, who they say was the "bastard son" born to a
direct union between the "serpent" (Satan, or Lucifer) and Eve.
This belief is called the doctrine of the "serpent's seed," often
called "two seedlines" or "seed of Satan."

"Seedline" preachers claim that today's Jews are counterfeits of
the true descendants of the house of Judah; that rather than
being a blessing to the world, as the true people of God were
intended to be, these counterfeits keep a stranglehold on the
economy of the Western world through their corrupt, usury based
banking systems, and are behind the production of all forms of
"entertainment" containing pornographic filth and anti-Christian
messages.
We are told that these "children of the Devil" cannot help but
perpetrate the lies of their father; it's in their nature, as
part of their genetic programming.
One of their greatest lies, we are told, was the Holocaust, said
to be the greatest hoax of the twentieth century - a lie
concocted and perpetuated by the Jews in order to win the
sympathy of the world, as they plot toward world dominion.
It's no secret that there are despots and fanatics in this world
who would like nothing better than the utter destruction of the
Jews. Hitter tried it; Saddam Hussein has threatened it. But now,
incredibly, we are seeing so-called "Christian ministers" - right
here in the United States, advocating a doctrine of hatred
against these same people!

And, believe it or not, some of the more fanatical of this lot
suggesting that the true Christian should be willing and ready to
wage war against the Jews!

HATRED IN THE NAME OF JESUS

One particularly outspoken "seed of Satan" preacher stated in a
message before a live audience: "I can never love a Jew, not in
million years; and he'll never love me. There's an inborn enmity
between us. We hate each other with a purple passion. I've read
the last chapter of this book [the Bible], and we win, we win,
with ... a purple hatred, a purple-passion hatred. "
The preacher boasted of how he is not afraid to curse the Jews.
"I call them the bastard sons of Satan that they are," he said;
"kinky-haired, beady-eyed, forked-tongued little bastards...."
He told of how he had said to his wife: "I doubt seriously if I
die of old age.... I'm going to die in a bloodbath, gun battle,
but I'm going to take a lot of them damn' Jews down with me when
I go."
He even seemed to suggest that wielding the sword against Jewery
is a Christian duty. He stated: "I pity the minister who stands
before Yahweh God with a clean, shiny, polished sword in his
hand. When I stand before Him, I want notches on my word, lots of
them. And I want blood on it, enemies' blood."
The preacher adamantly insisted that Jews cannot become
Christians, and will never enter the Kingdom of God. He stated
that God Himself has promoted and perpetuated the hatred that
supposedly exists between the Jews and White ("Adamite") 
Christians.

You may find it hard to believe that a professing-Christian
minister could stand up in a pulpit somewhere in the United
States and spout such hate-mongering nonsense; nevertheless, it
is true! The above quotations were taken from excerpts of two
taped messages given in October and November of 1990.
Some seedline preachers seem less malevolent than the one quoted
above, though their doctrine still appeals to the prejudices of
certain people. Dan Gayman, for instance, of the "Church of
Israel," headquartered in Schell City, Missouri, writes:
"Remember that God created all the races separately and
distinctly, that He has a plan and purpose for every race, and
that you should harbor hatred toward none of God's creation" (The
Watchman, Summer, 1989, p.26).

This seems to be in line with the teachings of genuine
Christianity. Yet, notice what the same author wrote in the
Summer, 1988 edition of The Watchman: "Is it not plain now for
you to see that those people who have the Talmud as their Bible
and the Synagogue as their temple, who have Lucifer as their God
and usury as their economic weapon in this world, are indeed an
evil people because they come from the fountain head of evil? Are
you not able to see that they have always been a vagabond and
fugitive race because they inherited these genetic qualities from
Cain? ... Do you not understand why they have always been the
shopkeepers, merchants, and bankers of all the nations and not
the farmers and tillers of the land? When you build the genetic
link to these people back to Cain, you have all the answers just
as close by as your nearest Bible" (p. 27).

Such a teaching can only arouse bigotry, hatred; give people with
anti-Semitic inclinations an "excuse" for their prejudice. But,
hopefully, all will admit that if the teaching is not true - if
the "seed of Satan" doctrine is not in agreement with the Word of
God - then it obviously has NO PLACE in Christianity! It should
be - must be - cast out as the ungodly, hate-mongering, DAMNABLE
HERESY that it is!

Herein you will find undeniable proof that the "serpent's seed"
teaching stands in bold contradiction to the clear and simple
TRUTH of your Bible! But first, let's briefly review the basic
premise of this doctrine.

"...THY SEED AND HER SEED"

Seedline preachers claim that Genesis 3:15 lies at the very
foundation of scriptural truth. It is held up as "probably the
single most important verse in the Holy Scriptures" (Charles Lee
Mange, The Two Seeds of Genesis 3:15, p.4), and is said to be
"the KEY to the grand truth of the Holy and Sacred Scriptures"
(ibid.). It is called "the seed plot of all scripture," and its
"proper understanding" is said to be "vital to the total pattern
of discerning all scripture" (ibid. p.12), and necessary "to a
mature understanding of Scripture or the World Situation" (ibid.
p.13).
In Genesis 3:15, God says, "And I will put enmity between thee
[the "serpent," or Satan] and the woman [Eve], and between thy
seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt
bruise his heel."
Seedline proponents argue that if "her seed" (Eve's legitimate
posterity) is a literal, flesh-and-blood race, then "thy seed"
(Satan's progeny) must also be a literal, flesh-and-blood race.
We are inconsistent in our interpretation, we are told, if we say
that one "seed" is literal and the other is spiritual, or
symbolic.
Thus, two races came from Eve - one by Satan, the other by Adam.
Adam's descendants, through Seth, are said to be the "holy
people" who have proclivities toward righteousness and good
deeds; while Satan's descendants, through Cain, have the
characteristics of the father of their race.
As you might imagine, the "forbidden fruit" (Genesis 3:6)
Eve partook of was not an apple! It was, we are told, illicit
sexual relations with the Devil.
According to the teaching, the "tree of the knowledge of good and
evil" represents the serpent, or Satan; the Hebrew word
translated "eat" can be rendered "lay"; the word "food" refers to
sex; "fruit" implies offspring, or the "seed" that produces
offspring.

Thus, Genesis 3:6 may be interpreted this way: "And when the
woman saw that Satan was good for sex, and that it was pleasant
to the eyes, and a serpent to be desired to make one wise [note:
sex and wisdom are related in pagan religions], she took of the
seed thereof, and did lay...."
Cain and Abel (Genesis 4:1-2), we are told, were twins, but had
different fathers. Satan was the father of Cain; Adam was the
father of Abel. "Two seeds" proponents point out that it is
possible for twins to have different fathers.
The serpent's seedline began with Cain, survived the Flood
through one or more of Noah's daughters-in-law, and continued
through the Canaanites and related peoples. In the time of Jesus,
they were found among the Pharisees, and in the world today, they
are known as Jews, who seedline preachers say are counterfeits of
the true House of Judah.
Proponents of this doctrine play hop-scotch through the
Scriptures, seeking out words and phrases that seem supportive of
their belief. They point to Matthew 3:7, where John the Baptist
calls the Pharisees and Sadducees a "generation [race] of vipers
[serpents]"; to Matthew 23, where Jesus calls the scribes and
Pharisees "serpents," a "generation of vipers," and "children f
them which killed the prophets."
They frequently cite John 8:44, where Jesus, speaking to a group
of Jews, says, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lies of
your father ye will do." They claim that it was this counterfeit
bastard seedline" who cried out, "Let Him [Jesus] be crucified!"
(Matthew 27:22-23), and who said, "His blood be on us, and on our
children" (verse 26).

One of the most frequent scriptural references appearing in
seedline publications is I John 3:12, which speaks of "Cain, who
was of that wicked one...." Another is John 10:26, where Jesus
says to the Jews, "But ye believe not, because you are not of my
sheep...." They also trace the Devil's seedline through the Old
Testament. They seem especially fond of passages such as
Zechariah 14:21, which foretells the time when "there shall be no
more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts"; and
Obadiah 18, which speaks of a time when "there shall not be any
remaining of the house of Esau."

To this latter verse, the afore-mentioned preacher added his
commentary: "Praise God," he said; "when this thing finally goes
down, you'll search this kingdom over and you will not find one
single solitary Jew left anywhere, because God has spoken it."
We could cite many other scriptures seedline preachers commonly
use as prooftexts, but the above should give you a sufficiently
clear picture of their doctrinal position and of the prejudice
and hatred that so obviously underlies their position.
Prejudice and hatred are by no means rare in the world in which
we live. Chances are, some of you reading this article have had,
at one time or another, negative feelings toward people of racial
or ethnic origins different from your own. Perhaps some of you
have feelings strong enough that you could be easily influenced
by the "seed of Satan" teaching. If so, realize that such
feelings can actually blind you to the truth of the revealed Word
of God!
So lay aside whatever prejudices you may have, now, as we put
this seedline doctrine to the acid test of Holy Scripture! It's
time we stopped allowing our feelings - our prejudices, our
animosities, our biases - to shape and form our beliefs! It's
time we start letting the Bible give us our beliefs, and stop
trying to read our own ideas into the Bible!
It's time we understood the TRUTH of this matter!

WHO WAS CAIN'S FATHER

As stated above, seedline preachers claim that Cain and Abel were
fraternal twins begotten of different fathers. Cain, said to be
Satan's son, was begotten first, before his twin brother Abel,
the son of Adam. Advocates of the doctrine say that this agrees
perfectly with Genesis 4:1-2.
But first, before we examine this passage, let's define two
important terms: exegesis and eisegesis. Simply stated, exegesis
is the use of those interpretational principles whereby one
derives information from a specific text. Eisegesis, on the other
hand, is the reading of one's own concepts and ideas into a
specific text.
As anyone should be able to see, the use of eisegesis in
interpreting the Scriptures can only lead to blatant error!
With this in mind, let's see if we can determine what Genesis
4:1-2 really says.

"And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain,
and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. And she again bare
his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of the sheep, but Cain
was a tiller of the ground."

Notice that this passage does not tell us that Cain and Abel were
fraternal twins. Just as we are not told how much time passed
before Cain and Abel took up their occupations of "keeper of
sheep" and "tiller of the ground," we are not told how much time
passed between the births of the two boys. The "fraternal twins"
theory is just that - a theory!
The passage does tell us that Cain was the son of ADAM! Notice
that (1) Adam "knew" Eve (all biblical scholars agree that the
word "knew," in this case, denotes a sexual union), (2) Eve
conceived, and (3) Eve gave birth to Cain.
Eve conceived after Adam "knew" her, and a male child, Cain,
resulted from that union! This is what the passage clearly says,
and this is the ONLY natural way to understand it! (The same
sequence-(1) sexual union, (2) conception, (3) birth - is found
in verse 17, and all agree on who is the father!).
The only way to make Cain the son of anyone other than Adam is to
read into the passage something that is not there! This is
eisegesis, and, as we have noted, eisegesis is a sure road to
FALSE DOCTRINE!

Now, let's see yet another example of how seedline preachers
pervert the true meaning of the Holy Scriptures.

EVE'S AFFAIR WITH THE DEVIL

We have noted, seedline preachers claim that the "tree of
knowledge of good and evil" represents Satan the devil. We also
noted that they insist upon "consistency" in interpreting the
symbols and terms we find in the Scriptures. They are notoriously
inconsistent in applying their own rule! Notice how the word
"tree[s]" is used in Genesis 3:1-3:
"Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field that
the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, hath God said,
Ye shall not eat of every TREE of the garden? And the woman said
unto the serpent, We may eat of fruit of the TREES of the garden:
But of the fruit of the TREE that is in the midst of the garden,
God hash said, Ye shall not it, neither shall even touch it.,
lest ye die."
If the "tree which is in the midst of the garden" represents some
thing other than a tree, as seedline preachers claim, then
shouldn't they stick to their rule of "consistency" and insist
that ALL the "trees of the garden" represent something other than
TREES? In FACT, doesn't "consistency" demand that the
fruit-bearing trees of the garden represent living beings on the 
same order as the Devil?
And what of the word "fruit"? If the "fruit of the tree which is
midst of the garden" is interpreted as the serpent's producing
"seed," shouldn't all other references to "fruit" in this section
of Scripture be interred accordingly? Further, if "eat" means
"lay" - thus carrying sexual connotations - then what are we to
do with Genesis 2:16-17, where God tells Adam that he may "freely
eat" of "every tree of the garden" except the "tree of the
knowledge of good and evil"? And what are we going to do with the
third chapter, where the word appears fifteen times?
Why not look this word up in a concordance, and see how it is
used in the second and third chapters of Genesis? You will find
that it cannot possibly mean anything but "eat"!

Surely any unbiased student of the Holy Scriptures can see the
folly in the seedline preachers' interpretational methods! There
can be little doubt that some amount of symbolism can be found in
the Genesis account, but the idea that Genesis 3:6 is a
description of an illicit sexual relationship involving Eve and
the Devil is a classic example of eisegesis - reading one's own
ideas into a specific text!
A natural reading of the text leaves no room for the idea that
"serpent" and the "tree" are one and the same; no room for the
idea that Eve's affair with the serpent in any way involved SEX.

Clearly the "seed of Satan" finds no support in the Genesis
account. We can only conclude that the doctrine is the bastard
offering of those seduced by the malignant HATRED that comes in
the guise of "righteousness"!

THE GENETICS "GOSPEL"

According to seedline preachers, the unfortunate progeny of the
"spurious counterfeit seedline" behave wickedly because they have
been genetically programmed to behave that way. They are utterly
helpless to behave any other way.

The "holy" seedline-beginning with Adam, and continuing through
Seth, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. - on the other hand, have
an inborn proclivity toward righteousness and good works. They
are the true, genetically "pure," Israelites (or "Adamites") who
accepted Christianity, who recognized the voice of their Shepherd
and followed Him. Today, they are the White, Anglo-Saxon, Celtic,
Lombardic, Germanic, Scandinavian, Slavonic, and Kindred peoples.
The outspoken preacher quoted near the beginning of this article
described this group as God's "...royal priesthood, his prize
possession, his dynasty of priests." He advised his audience to
engage in "fruit inspection" in order to find out "who's who, and
who's Jew" - for the two seedlines, we are told, can be
distinguished by their "fruits."

Gayman writes: "Just as the true seed of Abraham, descended
through Isaac and Jacob-Israel, has always displayed a proclivity
toward acceptance of Jesus Christ, confirmed a belief in the
Bible, has sought to build churches and embrace the faith of
Christianity, so have the children of Satan, the seedline of evil
sought to battle against Jesus Christ, wrestle and fight against
the Bible, wear down and destroy Christianity, and seek the ruin
demise of Christian culture from this earth. A bit of simple
logic will tell you that if good and positive things have been
sought by the true seed of Abraham, then negative and evil
programs have been the inspiration of those who are the
counterfeit seed of Abraham" (The Watchman, Summer, 1988, p.25).

The "genetics" message comes across loud and clear. We can
determine who the genetically defective "seed of the serpent" are
by simply looking at their "fruits" - their works, or deeds. And,
we are told, we must realize that they cannot "change their
spots," cannot turn to God in true repentance. Their "genetic
incoding" - inherited from their father the Devil - simply will
not permit it.
If this is true, then we should not be able to find any evidence
in Scripture that Cain or any of his descendants could have
changed for the better. But we do find such evidence!
Notice Genesis 4:3-7: "And in process of time it came to pass,
that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the
LORD. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock
and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to
his offering: But unto Cain and of his offering He had no respect
And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
"And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy
countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be
accepted [margin: lifted up]? and if thou doest not well, sin
lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou
shalt rule over him [margin: resist sin]."

The New American Standard Bible renders the latter portion of
verse 7 this way: "And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at
the door, and its desire is for you, but you must master it."
If Cain could not help but commit sin - if he was bound by his
"genetic incoding," and could only do what he had been programmed
to do - then WHY did God admonish Him to DO BETTER, and to MASTER
ANY DESIRE TO COMMIT SIN? If Cain had no choice in the matter,
then God's admonition would have been pointless!
Clearly, Cain was not locked into some pattern of behavior
predetermined by his "genetic incoding"! True, he went on to
murder his brother, but he did have a choice in the matter - it
was not a matter of genetics!
Moreover, if the so-called "holy seed" have proclivities opposite
those of the "wicked seed," then why did the House of Israel fail
so miserably? Why did the descendants of Jacob-Israel turn to
evil time after time?
You would think that a people with proclivities toward
righteousness would respond positively to God, especially after
seeing the mighty miracles He did in Egypt, and after having
escaped into the wilderness by way of a miraculous opening in the
Red Sea. But after witnessing these marvellous miracles, hardly
any time had passed before they turned to idolatry (Exodus 32).
It would seem that a people with a natural inclination toward
faith and good works would delight in hearing the voice of God,
and would be overjoyed to receive His commandments (see
Deuteronomy 5). But such was not the case with the "holy seed"
Israel. Their negative attitude and lack of faith brought a most
revealing response from God: "O that there were such an heart
them," He said, "that they would fear me, and keep my
commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with
their children for ever!" (verse 29).

If the true descendants of Jacob-Israel always had a proclivity
toward accepting Christianity, building churches, and believing
the Bible, then why did the vast majority of them stumble at the
"Stumblingstone" (Romans 9:31-33); why were they called a
disobedient and gainsaying people" (Romans 10:21; Isaiah 5:l-2);
why did the majority of them "fall," leaving only a remnant
(Romans 11) to form the foundation of the New Testament church?
And if the Israelites have always had a greater proclivity toward
accepting Christianity than non-Israelite races, how do you
explain the fact that once Paul's ministry was well underway,
more non-Israelites than Israelites were converted to
Christianity? (Please read the ninth, tenth, and eleventh
chapters of Romans.) And why do we find, in the very end of the
age, the conversion of 144,000 Israelites, compared with an
innumerable multitude - perhaps hundreds of thousands - "...of
all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues" (Revelation
7:4-9)?

Where is the evidence of this so-called "genetic incoding" that
causes Shem's descendants to behave one way and Canaan's
descendants to behave another way? The truth is, no such evidence
exists! Throughout much of their history, the children f Israel
seemed all too eager to embrace the ways of the heathen - to
erect idols, commit whoredom, forget God's holy law!
It may be true that different races have (to some extent)
different inborn proclivities, but when measured against the
standards of God's law of righteousness, every race comes up
short! And if not for the GRACE OF GOD, none of us would stand a
chance!
That's why Paul could say, "For there is no difference between
the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto
all that call upon Him" (Romans 10:12).
 
CAN ANGELS MARRY

Seedline advocates often point to Genesis the sixth chapter as
"proof' that angelic beings can (or could, before the Flood)
cohabit with women and engender children.
Let's read a portion of the text, and see if the theory holds up.
"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of
the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of
God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took
them wives of all which they chose" (verses 1-2).
Seedline preachers tell us that the "sons of God" were angels -
in this case, fallen angels, or demons, who were merely following
along in the talon-tracks of their diabolical leader. They assume
that because the expression "sons of God" is used of angels a few
times in the Old Testament, it must be speaking of angels in this
passage.
However, they entirely overlook the fact that the expression
"sons of God" (or "children of God") is used far more often of
HUMAN BEINGS - particularly God fearing human beings - than of
angels. Further, it never seems to occur to seedline proponents
that "sons of God" is hardly an appropriate expression for
demonic spirits!
If we understand "sons of God" to mean God-fearing human beings,
then the major theme of the chapter becomes crystal clear:
God-fearing men married the daughters of men who did not fear
God. This led to less God-fearing and more of the opposite -
until, finally, there were no God-fearing people left, except for
Noah (please read the entire chapter).

The origin of the "giants" (Hebrew: nephilim) mentioned in verse
4 is not clear. The verse seems to say that they were on the
earth before the "sons of God" took wives of the "daughters of
men." Whether this is correct or not, there is certainly no
reason to believe that the nephilim were half-human/half-angel
creatures. A simple concordant study of the word will show that
nephilim - "giants" - were still on the earth long after the
Flood.
After considering the facts - after accepting what the text does
say, and dismissing what it does not say - we find no support for
the "angels married women" theory. Our position is further
strengthened by Jesus' statement that the "children of the
resurrection" shall be "like the angels" in that they "neither
marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die anymore"
(Luke 20:35-36).

Clearly, Genesis the sixth chapter provides no support for the
"seed of Satan" doctrine!

                            ..................

TO BE CONTINUED


  Home Top of Page Next Page

 
Navigation List:
 

 
Word Search:

PicoSearch
  Help