Jesus, in Matthew 23, went on and on about the treachery of the scribes and Pharisees, calling them ‘serpents’ and so forth. After calling them serpents, Jesus added that they were the progeny of poisonous snakes.
Of course, those people were
neither serpents nor progenitors of viviparous snakes; they were sons of the
Devil, according to Jewish thinking.
One thing that makes Judeo-Christianity
seem mythological is the notion of a talking serpent.
Any ‘devil’ is a supernatural
spirit. The Devil — the Serpent — is the foremost supernatural spirit. That
Lucifer is the devilish spirit comes from his purpose; Isaiah wrote of him
it as the adversary of God (Isa 14:13-14). Satan means ‘Adversary.’
Devils are spirits that oppose
God. The scribes and Pharisees were opposing Jesus, the Person of God, during His
entire ministry.
Of course, the scribes and
Pharisees were not supernatural spirits but natural men. However, they were daimonizomai in the Greek — possessed by
devils. How do devils possess people? Devils get into them via their minds. Those
cunning men were not literally snakes nor poisonous, but their natures were as
the Beast — the Serpent itself.
Unlike Yahweh, Lucifer is confined by time and space. For example, demons and Satan appeared to Job from elsewhere:
There was a day when
the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also
among them. And the Lord said unto Satan, “From where do you come?” Then Satan
answered the Lord, and said, “From going to and fro in the earth, and from
walking up and down in it” (Job 1:6:7)
The Serpent was not in the
scribes and Pharisees. It could not be in multiple people at one time. The
Devil was certainly in King Herod the Great because he was the first adversary
of Jesus, seeking Him in His infancy. Of course, Satan entered Judas (Luke 22:3),
and with Judas dead, surely Satan entered Caiphas the chief priest.
How did Satan enter unto all
those various people: genetically is one answer. He was in their genes,
so to enter them spiritually was an easy task.
Herod was Jewish outwardly but
Arab inwardly.
Judas’s lineage is unknown but
since he was from Kerioth, Judas was at least partly Arab.
How about Caiaphas? He was of the ‘House of
Ananias’ and chief priest after the five sons of Ananias. As the son-in-law of
Ananias, Caiphas would inherit the family name by genealogy rather than spirituality.
Although Jewish, Caiaphas was the generation of vipers from Ananias, his sons,
and then himself.
The point therein is that the ‘Serpent’
Satan is not in anyone but the most adversarial person at any given time.
From a historical perspective,
when Simon the Sorcerer received the Spirit, it was not the Holy Spirit, but
Satan entered him. In the early Church it was the Gnosticism of Simon Magus
that haunted Christianity, and most certainly it was Simon who was the ‘thorn’
in the side of Paul, “There was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger
of Satan to buffet me” (2 Cor 12:7). Ostensibly, Simon became the messenger of
Satan who troubled Paul during his journeys.
So, if you think that Satan made you
do anything, unless you are a very significant person, you are giving Satan
too much credit. He is not in you, but you are of him because the genes of the
Serpent are in you, just as Cain was of the Wicked One (1 John 3:12). As the
son of Cain, you are of the Wicked One yourself in your natural state.
Satan is in you, not in spirit,
but in your nature. You, if you have not been born again, think like Lucifer.
You magnify yourselves as if you all are gods!
What were the scribes and Pharisees
doing? They were essentially making a name for themselves at the expense of
God. By pursuing and diminishing Jesus, they were exalting themselves. Jesus
only pointed out to them that their natures were like the Beast; that they were
progeny of Cain, thus them raising Cain to prominence.
Jesus nailed it: “You (all) make
clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of
extortion and excess” (Mat 23:35). Although they were ceremonially clean
outwardly, their genetics were daimonizomai — possession by demons. Demons
had gotten into them genetically as they too were not really ‘sons of Aaron’
but ‘sons of Cain.’
Adam was the first chief priest.
As the first supposed son of Adam (Gen 4:1), Cain was the second chief
priest by the law of primogeniture, albeit he was not even the son of Adam but
the ‘son of the Serpent.’
Satan got into everyone, but
Jesus, genetically, hence any mention of ‘gens’ in any word in the Bible points
toward genetics.
David confessed how sin got into
himself, “I was shapen in iniquity” (Psalm 51:5). King David was depraved because
it was in his genetics.
When Jesus used “generation of
vipers” he revealed to the scribes and Pharisees how the Serpent got into them.
They were born that way since none of them had experienced rebirth. If you have
not been born again, you too are a viper because the blood of Cain is in you.
Jesus was talking genetics; “That
upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the Earth, from the blood
of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom you slew
between the temple and the altar” (Mat 23:35). Because the scribes, Pharisees,
and all the unredeemed are of Cain, they are as responsible as Cain of
murdering righteous Able.
Hopefully, it has been demonstrated
that Cain was not the son of Adam, and not of God. His father was the Devil,
and so it is for the sons of Cain. The scribes, as old-timers say, were indeed ‘raising
Cain.’
Jesus raised righteous Abel. Now
for some conjecture… if Cain was of the Wicked One and Eve, “the mother of all
living” (Gen 3:20), then Abel was the son of God and the woman.
Adam, unlike Eve, was not the
father of all living. Jesus called Abel ‘righteous’ and as the son of the
Wicked One, Cain was unrighteous.
I submit that Abel was of God. “The
Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering” (Gen 4:4) and not Cain (Gen
4:5). It was surely because Cain was not the son of God, but Abel was. Perhaps
God created Abel to atone for the sins of Cain, but Cain rejected the grace of
God and killed his ‘Savior.’
Abel was to cover the sins of
Cain with the blood of his lamb. However, Cain would endeavor to cover his own
sins without the shedding of blood. Blood must be shed for the redemption of
sins, and Cain thought that the works of his own hands were sufficient! “Without
shedding of blood is no remission” (Heb 9:22).
As for the blood of Zacharias, he
came to the princes of Judah to condemn them and they killed him, “They
conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the
king in the court of the house of the Lord” (2 Chron 24:21). Zechariah shed his
blood for the remission of the sins of the royal house. Blood must be shed for
the remission of sins, and that applied all the way from the killing of Abel
and Zachariah, and to Jesus.
Blessed are we, because Jesus
shed His own blood for even our genetic sins — “sins that are past” (Rom 3:25).
Thanks to the blood of Jesus fixing our genetics, Christians are no longer of
the Serpent, and Satan is no longer in us.
No comments:
Post a Comment