By Dark Knight GT @ forums.stangnet.com – 2004
It has been my great pleasure to give this typed report to you, the reader. I hope that you will keep an open mind with the evidence that has been put together to give an in depth explanation concerning Cain, Sargon the Magnificent, The Kenites, Satan, early history in Mesopotamia, and even the base of Babylonian mythology. This write up has been no easy task and has taken me many hours alone to type and review it. Not to mention the many years of study which I have done to obtain this knowledge. My only hope is that you the reader will receive a further education than that which you already posses and that this report will further edify all which reads in terms of the puzzles of history, the Bible, and Babylonian mythology. With that being said and without further delay, lets get into the typed report and learn about these puzzling difficulties that has puzzled may scholars for many, many years. Its been divided into multiple posts for length, so be patient while I post each one.
In early Akkadian History, we find a puzzling difficulty, which has faced many scholars. This puzzle is as to the identity of the first leader of the Akkadian people. Many scholars are left puzzled because in the Assyrian and Babylonian tablets there is a maze of names and events scattered about. It has been both the pleasure and challenge of many scholars to try and piece together the identities and events in these tablets. So far, they have discovered that one of the earliest, if not the first leader of the Akkadian people was “Alusharshid”. Remains of broken pottery has been found in Nippur, a city in Mesopotamia (Assyria and Babylon) dating back to about 3800 B.C. attests to this early king in Akkadian history who was responsible for the conquest and subjection of the land of Elam. He was stated to have conquered this land for his god “Bel”. Alusharshid also contributes his great power and authority to his god Bel as well and it is stated that, “Bel hath given all kingdoms into his hands”. The interesting thing about this is Alusharshid was not the only king who performed this act. We find in alleged “later” Akkadian history, Sargon the Magnificent was attributed with performing the same act. He too was stated to have been a servant of the god Bel and was stated to have invaded and conquered Elam for his god Bel. In other texts, we find that Sargon (much like Alusharshid) was stated to have attributed his great power and authority to the god Bel and stated “Bel hath made him king of all lands”.
Therefore, there is a great possibility that Sargon the Magnificent and Alusharshid was in fact two different names representing the same early Akkadian king. Many people would object to this for historians believe that Sargon would have reigned at a later date. Sargon The Magnificent (Sargon I) is stated by many scholars to have reigned somewhere in the times of 2800-2100 B.C. The reason why there is such a long estimation is because accordingly to the historical tablets, Sargon held a reign for 730 years. Many scholars have regarded this as being “fabulous” and “mythological”. For they attest that no one ever in history could have lived for 730 years, let alone reign as a king for that long period of time. They attest this “mythological age” falls in the same category as the early Babylonian tales of early man and creation where early man in their tablets was stated to have lived for many centuries. Similar to those early patriarchs found in The Holy Bible and in the book of Genesis. As a matter of fact, many historians believe that the stories told in ancient Mesopotamia were indeed the early prototype in which the stories in Genesis would be founded upon. It is my contention however that the stories told in the early chapters of Genesis would be the base formation for the Babylonian myths, and thus much of world mythology. I shall speak more on this later.
For now however, I would like to dispute the date given to Sargon the Magnificent. It is my contention (as well as other scholars) that Sargon the Magnificent did indeed reign in the time of 3800-3100 B.C. and not 2800-2100 B.C. The confusion of Sargon’s date is due to the controversy over an object called “The foundation stone of Naram-sin”. Naram-sin is stated to have been the son of Sargon (grandson by other sources) and he would reign as a prince during Sargon’s reign and would eventually succeed him on the throne. Naram-sin ordered record be kept of his many expeditions to other lands and conquering thereof. The records were recorded in large part on this “Foundation stone” of Naram-Sin. In later time, this foundation stone would be buried beneath one of the temples only to be lost for the following thousands of years to come. Finally, in the time of Nabonidas (the last king of Babylon before it fell to the Median-Persians) the foundation stone of Naram-sin was recovered. It seems Nabonidas had a taste for antiquities and for the history of his kingdom. He had ordered all historical records be found and recovered and thus after extensive searching, the foundation stone was recovered. Nabonidas would make a report of this in his historical tablets. He stated, “The foundation stone of Naram-sin has not been seen in my kingdom for 3,200 years.” Now, Nabonidas reigned in about 550 B.C. 3,200 years before this time would place the date of the foundation stone back to 3,750 B.C. and thus placing Naram sin’s father Sargon back to 3800 B.C. and perhaps before.
Modern historians and Assyriologists dispute this fact. They claim either Nabonidas made a mistake in his dating or one of his scribes either misinterpreted or misquoted Nabonidas by a 1,000 years. Thus, they claim Sargon’s date goes forward to 2800-2100 B.C. It is my contention that Nabonidas was not incorrect in his dating of the foundation stone and that his scribes did not err in their writings. Was not Nabonidas a royal king? Did he not reign some 2,500+ years closer to the time of Sargon than we today? Was he not well educated in the history of his land and possibly had access to older historical writings during his reign, which no longer exist today? It follows logically to me to believe he was correct. It also doesn’t make sense that his scribes would have erred as I’m sure Nabonidas was going to read their work after they were finished with it. Thus, if it were erred, he would have fixed it and probably executed the scribe for such an error. Thus, I do believe Sargon the Magnificent (Sargon I) did rule between 3800-3100 B.C.
Another puzzling feature of the early Akkadians was there bizarre system of mythology and religious beliefs. From what many historians can tell, this system of early mythology would form the base for later mythology such as Greek, Roman, Norse, and even possibly Egyptian mythology. Not to mention many travelers from the lands of Sumer and Akkad (another name for ancient Mesopotamia) would spread their culture and thus this religion the world over. So, without further delay, lets examine these “bizarre beliefs” which were held by the Akkadians in their early religion.
After a brief study of what has been called “Chaldean Genesis”, Assyriologists, historians, and religious students have noticed in early Akkadian mythology, we have a “trio” of gods with the names “Anu, Bel (also called Mul-lil and En-lil), and Ea. Accompanying this trio of gods is a fourth god called “Tammuz”.
Anu is stated to be “the head of the gods and the divine figure of divinity”. His symbol at times is the simple star and at other times the Maltese cross. He is called often times the ruler of the heavens whose servants are angelic beings. He is also stated to be the husband of Ishtar, the queen goddess of heaven, as well as the father of the god Tammuz. He is also stated to have reign over the great Garden of Edin or Eden and had divine bulls as his symbol in that great garden. In other texts he is referred to as having “human attributes” such as being known as the father figure of mankind and the “Sumerians”. Thus, we see he clearly has the attributes of a powerful god but at the same time the human features we find in the Biblical character “Adam” of the book of Genesis. Therefore, many historians believe this was Adams early prototype. In case you are wondering who the “Sumerians” are, I shall explain.
When examining the history of the residents of ancient Mesopotamia, it seems to be accepted by most scholars and historians alike that there were two distinct groups of people who lived in the Land. These two groups of people were actually two different races. They are commonly called “the Akkadians” and “the Sumerians”. From what we can tell in the early pictures and remains, the Akkadians were a more “Semitic” looking race where as the Sumerians appear to look more “African” or black. Many Assyriologists believe the Akkadians arrived in Mesopotamia at a later date than the Sumerians and the Sumerians seem to have held residency in the land of Mesopotamia since the early portions of civilized history. The Akkadians were stated to have arrived “Mysteriously” and “Suddenly”. Their whereabouts before this time seem to be unclear to most historians. The Sumerians however, were a race of people which lived overall peaceful lives it seems aside from their possible battles with the Akkadians. They engaged in trade and work together as a community and it seems probable that the majority of the Sumerians were a socially interactive middle class people. Most of their trade was done with their closest of neighbors and some trade was believed to have occurred by means of Caravans along the Tigris river. Although these two people dwelled together in the same lands, it does appear that one race held more influence and power than the other race and thus is often considered the “superior” race of the two distinct peoples. The superior race is the Akkadians and the inferior, the Sumerians. This is clearly portrayed in the tablets of the Akkadians and Sumerians for the Sumerians were always noted as “their servants” and their “workers”. I note these details because they are of much importance for many historians ascribe to the inferior race the creation of these “mythological stories” yet it is my contention they belong to the so called “superior race”. I shall explain more on this later. For now, let’s continue with the mythological characters. I will continue with “Tammuz”.
Tammuz is stated to have been “The young god whose home was in that great garden, the Garden of Edin or Eden in the vicinity of Eridu (The area in Babylon where the garden of Eden was believed to have been located by most historians). His mother (and wife) was “The Lady of Eden (Ishtar). Also, he was noted in the tablets to be a “shepherd” and was slew early in his youth. Leaving his mother (Ishtar) weeping for her son Tammuz. Later tablets attribute his death to the sun god “Adar” which I will discuss more about later on. From this description, Assyriologists believe this to be the early prototype of “Abel” the young shepherd slew in his youth in the Book of Genesis.
Ea, another god in the first trio of gods is stated to have been “the god of all knowledge” and his female partner often at times seems to be the wife of Anu, Ishtar. Ea is also regarded as being one half of the parents of Tammuz in certain texts. Thus, I believe (as well as others) that Ea was the male mythological representation of Eve while Ishtar represents Eve in the feminine sense. Many would debate this simply because the sexes of the two entities Ishtar and Ea are opposites. However, it seems the Akkadian priests had a way of “mystifying” their writings and thus this could be part of the mystification in their writings. In certain writings, Ishtar was stated to have been male at sunrise and female and sunset. Thus, Ea could be her “male side”. Ea is stated to be “the god of knowledge and the god of the deep” in certain texts while Ishtar is state to be “the lady of knowledge and the goddess of the deep”. These attributes demonstrate the connection between the two. Both Ea and Ishtar were also stated to be the parents of Tammuz thus connecting both of them with Eve as well. Perhaps the greatest form of proof can be found in the fact the names Ea and Ishtar. “Ea” sounds almost identical to “Eve” and the word “woman” in Hebrew (which Eve was often called) is “Ishar” in the Hebrew tongue is almost identical to “Ishtar”.
The third in the “great trio of gods” in Akkadian mythology is Bel. He would later be called “Baal” by the many of the Israelites during their times of Idolatrous practices. Bel is stated in the mythological texts to be “The god of the underworld whose servants are demons and nightmares of the night, which go forth to plague mankind with suffering.” He is also called “Mul-lil”, “En-lil”, and even “Akki the devil god” in other texts. He is also stated to be “the god of the surface of the earth whose concern is the affairs of men”. He has been identified by these characteristics as being the Akkadian type of the biblical Satan.
Because of these vast “similarities” between the ancient Babylonian myths and the stories told in the book of Genesis, many scholars feel that clearly the knowledge which led to the formation of the Genesis stories and Babylonian myths must be related somehow. Some people feel that the stories of The Bible were taken into ancient Sumer and Akkad (ancient Babylon) at some early date in history and there they would suffer a mystifying fate in which these stories of “mythology and gods” would be developed upon. Others feel oppositely. They believe the stories that are found in the Bible were first developed in Ancient Babylon by the Akkadians and Sumerians and would later be taken by Abraham, who was a resident of the land of the Chaldees (another name for ancient Babylon) into the area of Egypt and Palestine and it would be there the Bible stories would be formed upon this knowledge in the time of Moses. A third belief is that the knowledge of creation was known by early man and was taken by two different groups of people into the two different lands and there was developed into their own independent versions. Although there is much evidence for each of these theories, it is my own theory that the knowledge of creation was knew in early times by early man. Then, in later time, it would be carried by two sources into two different lands. Those lands being ancient Babylon and the other, early Israel. To help prove this, I shall first demonstrate evidence for the most popular theory concerning this dilemma. That theory being the knowledge of God traveled from Babylon to the rest of the world and would be the base in which the Bible was formed. Then, I shall attempt to disprove this knowledge and in doing so further prove my theory that the stories told by the Akkadians were nothing more than the corrupt version of the simple truth.
Many historians and scholars feel the early Babylonian myths formed the basis for the Bible namely because of how far back the Babylonian myths date. It is believed that in the time of Hammurabi (2000-2200 B.C.) there was a great “literary revival” in which all the traditions, myths, legends, religious beliefs, historical stories, etc. were written down into a collection of books. Amongst these records were the ancient Akkadian stories of creation and the Akkadian stories of their “gods”. Because of this date, this puts the Akkadian and Babylonian version of creation back before the time of Moses by multiple centuries. In addition to this proof, scholars use the fact that Abraham was stated to have come from this land in which these stories were told and thus he could have easily passed on these stories to his children and this “passing of knowledge” would continue until the time of Moses. One other large part that leads to this theory is the seemingly similarities in both the Bible story of creation and the ancient Babylonian story of creation. I shall now quote Professor Kittel’s summary of the Akkadian version of creation.
“When on high, the heavens were not named, and below the firmament was not yet designated…then were the gods formed…In the beginning the chaotic waters, called Tiamat held sway. They were the enemies of order. As the gods wished to create from these an orderly world, Tiamat arose a dragon against them. Ignominious terror seized the gods, until Marduk, the god of the spring sun, undertook to battle with the monster and its companions. He conquered it, and cut the dragon into two halves, and made out of the one heavens, and out of the other in like manner the earth, upon which he then brought forth animals and men”(Babylonian and Oriental excavations page 39)
This, along with the similarities between the names of the “gods” in Akkadian mythology is what namely leads to the belief that the Bible was formed from these stories.
Clearly whoever wrote the story of creation found in Genesis had a very different thinking mind when compared to the author of what appears to be a “corrupt version of truth”. To argue against their popular theory, I shall note that although the stories of Akkadian creation existed in “written form” before the time of Moses, this doesn’t mean that the true stories of creation were not preserved by Adams race in oral tradition until the time of Moses when they were then transferred to written form which I shall attempt to prove. Secondly, although the Akkadian stories seem similar, there are still large differences. For starters it seems that while in mythology of the world, the golden rule has always been “A god always stays a god”, the Bible seems to be the only exception. It’s obvious whoever was responsible for the Bible’s authorship didn’t regard the “gods” spoken of in Akkadian mythology as being “gods” at all. The proof of this is in the fact that while Anu, Ea, Bel, and Tammuz were “gods” in the Akkadian and Babylonian stories, they were nothing more than simple “humans” in the Bible and the almighty and powerful “Bel” became nothing more than a fallen Cherubim angel who’s glory is portrayed as nothing but disgraceful shame in the Bible. “Anu” also seems to have suffered a great degradation for he became a simple man named “Adam” who clearly was far from being a “god” at all and who became nothing more than the first man to fall from grace and commit sin in God’s word, the Bible. It also seems that a mysterious and single “GOD” was placed above them and he seems to be the only true God who exists through out the Bible.
If what many scholars theorize is true, and if the Bible is nothing more than the stories of Akkadian creation in another form, then why the immense changes to the characters being portrayed? Why did the author suffer the stories of “gods” to become that of simple human beings? After all, in all mythology a “god” always remained a “god”. Despite what land the stories traveled to, what language the story was told in, and what characteristics were changed, the “gods” always remained “gods”. Why also did a polytheistic religion turn into a monotheistic one in which only one god held supreme power? Why the sudden change from what appears to be “an unbreakable rule”? My answer is simple. The Bible does NOT owe its true origin to the Akkadian mythological stories. The stories told in Akkadian mythology are nothing more than the same stories told in the Bible and the roles of the early people mentioned therein seems to have been changed somewhat to suit the authors purposes and the individuals spoken of in the first chapters of Genesis were deified into the form of “gods”.
On top of all these confusing stories, it seems two of the most profound biblical characters found in the first few chapters of Genesis are missing. The mighty God of the Israelites and Cain! So what then? Why were these two entities mentioned in The Bible but not in the Akkadian stories? We’ve clearly seen the vast similarities between the two yet this startling fact may be the biggest difference maker. Why were these two characters missing? For, if the Bible was formed from the Akkadian stories, then why are these two characters not portrayed in the Akkadian stories? It is my contention that the God of the Israelites was removed from the simple truth when it was corrupted in order to seemingly “eliminate” the God of the Bible’s presence from existence in the minds of those reading these stories. As for Cain, it is my contention that although Cain wasn’t found in the earliest unit of “gods”, he would be added later in the form of “Adar”, a mighty sun god who slew Tammuz. I shall explain more later on.
After reading and learning all of this, one is left asking and wondering a question that has puzzled many people for centuries. If God’s word is true, if the stories told therein are true, and if mythology is nothing more than a corrupt version of the “original truths” then who could have been responsible for the creation of the Akkadian mythology? It would clearly have to be someone who had the knowledge of creation. Someone who understood the stories told in the first chapters of Genesis. For, to take that knowledge and corrupt it, you must first understand and know it. It would also have to be written by someone before the time of Hammurabi, which would be before the time of approx. 2200 B.C. since it was in this time the great literary revival occurred and these stories were re-written down and collected by the priests of Hammurabi.
To explain this perplexing dilemma, we must first take a look at the history of the Akkadian priesthood and see what we find and the beginning of their priesthood. For, if we can figure out who the first priests were, we may be able to figure out who was responsible for their religious writings.
After a comparison of the writings of the most profound authorities on the subject of Akkadian and Babylonian history, Mrs. Sydney Bristowe notes in her book “Sargon the Magnificent”, that at the beginning of the Akkadian priest hood is the mighty king Sargon I (Sargon the Magnificent) whom I spoke of earlier. She further stated that he was indeed the first true priest king of the Akkadians and thus the diviner of constituted law and that it was her contention (as well as other historians) that the mythological Spring sun god “Marduk”, also called “Merodach” was none other than the deified form of Sargon the Magnificent. She then goes on to draw vast comparisons between Sargon and Marduk to prove this theory. One of her first forms of proof is that amongst the many tablets of the Babylonian and Akkadian history, some tablets interestingly state the words “Sargon is my god”. Thus, giving reason to believe that Sargon would have his memory deified into the form of a god. After all, if the stories of the other “gods” were nothing more than the stories of men, why wouldn’t the mighty Sargon have been deified into the form of a “god”? We clearly know from the monuments that Sargon was not just any king. He was a great and powerful king having a kingdom, which spread across the majority of central Asia and seems to have eventually spread to such areas as Knossos, Crete and the island of Cyprus. There is even the possibility that some of his followers reach as far as the British Isles. Naturally, if the early stories of “gods” were men, certainly Sargon would have been deified as well.
One interesting thing Mrs. Bristowe points out is that the names “Merodach and Marduk” may well have come from the word “Marad”, which means “To rebel”. Interestingly enough, Sargon does seem to have been quite the “rebel” in his vast rebellions against other lands. Further proof to show that Merodarch was Sargon the Magnificent defied is that while Merodcah is portrayed as “The divine entity at the base of the priesthood”, Sargon is stated to have been “The first priest king”. Merodach is portrayed in the astrological stories as “Being the divine reaper, plowing his plow across the fields and gardens of the heavens”. Interestingly enough, it was during Sargon’s time that a great rise in farming and agriculture took place and he seemingly was at the head of it. Further proof lies in the fact that Marduk was noted to have been “The lord of the date” in the tablets. Interestingly enough, Sargon was stated to have used “dates” as a method of payment for the taking of immense goods from other lands and these “dates” would go down in history as being “the dates of Akkad”. There are those who would attempt to argue against this by saying if Sargon was deified into the form of a god, then it surely would have happened in his time and clearly he would have been responsible for his own deification. However, it does seem to be the golden rule in literature and mythology that the authors seemingly do not write/tell stories about themselves but rather about people around them and other stories in which they’ve heard. Thus, this would explain why Sargon never deified himself but would have been deified by his followers.
Another great form of proof that Sargon and Merodach are in fact the same entities may lie in the fact that while in the inscriptions, “En-lil”(another name for Bel) is stated to have “contributed all lands to Merodach”, the same god En-lil is contributed with bestowing Sargon’s kingdom to him. Professor King writes:
“It has long been known that the early Babylonian king Sharru-kin, or Sargon of Akkad, had pressed up the Euphrates to the Mediterranean, and we now have information that he too was fired by the desire for precious wood and metal. We learn that after his complete subjugation of southern Babylonia, he turned his attention to the west, and that En-lil gave him the lands ‘From the upper sea, to the lower sea’, and from the Mediterranean to the Persian gulf”. ( Legends of Babylon and Egypt page 8. )
Now, this leaves one speculating and wondering. If the great spring sun god “Marduk” is nothing more than Sargon deified by his followers and the stories are based upon their “memory of him”. If this is also the “code” if you would for which mythology and literature is formed, that is to say, basing the stories of those you’re in contact with and leaving yourself out of the equation, then where did Sargon receive his “knowledge” of the story of creation, Adam, Eve, Satan, and Abel? This question is seemingly tied into the other previous question. Why was the God of the Bible and Cain not mentioned in these Akkadian mythological stories if they were nothing more than the adaptation of the stories told in the Bible? These are questions that have puzzled people for centuries but I feel that thanks to Mrs. Sydney Bristow, as well as the attentiveness of the reader, the answer is ours. The answer to these perplexing questions seems to lie in the identity of Sargon the Magnificent. Just who was this mighty king in the early dawn of history? To answer this, let’s examine Sargon’s name and what we know of his life from the Akkadian manuscripts.
The name “Sargon” seems to be a combination if you would of a title and a name. The word “sar” is an interesting word. In Hebrew, it means “ruler”. In Akkadian, it means “king”. Thus, other related words would be “shar, czar, sir, sire, etc.”. The word “gon” is better translated “Ghan” as in other manuscripts Sargon is called “Sharghani”. The name “Ghan” is also translated into other languages as “Khan” and Khan means “Cain”! So the appropriate translation of “Sargon” is “King Cain”!
Further support for this theory comes from additional information about “Merodach” whom I clearly regard as Sargon the Magnificent (King Cain) deified into the form of a “god”. Merodach is stated to have been “The first-born child of Ea and Davkina (the wife of Ea and also another name for Ishtar). However, in other texts Merodach’s father isn’t Ea but instead is the god Anu, whom I showed earlier, was Adam in a deified form. Interestingly enough, Tammuz (the mythological representation for Abel) is stated to have been as well a son of Ea and Davkina. If Ea, as I’ve shown earlier is nothing more than Eve deified into the form of a “male god”, if Davkina is nothing more than another name for Ishtar, and if Ishtar is nothing more than Eve defied in her feminine form, then clearly these two sons and brothers (Merodach and Tammuz) clearly represent Cain and Abel, especially if Merodach is regarded as the “first-born”. After all, Cain was indeed the first-born son of Eve. It should also be noted that Sargon as well is stated to have been the son of the god Ea and begotten of Ishtar. Thus further proof in connecting him and Merodach as being the same entity.
Addition proof lies in the stories told regarding Merodach. In the Bible, Cain is noted as the “tiller of the soil”. In the Hibbert Lectures by Professor Sayce, we find the following quotation that shows the link between Merodach and Cain.
“The plowman of the celestial fields. The sun god who trod his steady path through the heavenly signs like the patient ox dragging the plow through the fields below”. (Hibbert lectures page 291)
And under the title of Asari-Elim (Another name for Merodach) we have the following quotation:
“The donor of fruitfulness, the donor of agriculture. The creator of grains and plants causes the green herb to spring forth”. (Clay, The origins of Biblical traditions page 211)
To anyone who regards Merodach and Cain as being the same entity, the following quotation should be of utmost value. Professor Hall writes:
“Legends…assign to the Babylonian god Marduk the work of reducing the primeval chaos to order by the separation of the land from the water and first founding of the homes of men…we evidently have here a very vivid recollection of the time when the whole of southern of Babylonia was a swamp: the primitive inhabitants were scattered about on various islands which emerged out of the fens, and in these islands, towns arose, just as Ely and Petersborough arose in England under certain circumstances: dykes were heaped up and the shallows were gradually reclaimed, till the demon of the watery chaos, Tiamat finally vanquished, retreated from the land: Marduk had created the land and the two great rivers, and, in the words of the legend, ‘declared their names to be good’.”( History of the near East, page 175.)
Was this perhaps a way of the followers of Cain attributing to his legacy the great act of clearing away the chaotic waters and the bringing of civilization to their land? It certainly seems so.
Now, after reading this one will be looking for “the cherry on top” sort of to speak by asking “Well, if Sargon is Cain and if Merodach is his mythological representation, then did he slay Tammuz in the story tablets? The answer is no. Now, don’t get disappointed right away. We must remember that so far it seems as if the “true identities” of these supposed “gods” has been shrouded in mystery and mystification on purpose to elude one from the truth. Thus, you will find no trace of the beloved “Merodach” as murdering Tammuz. However, Tammuz was indeed murdered in the Akkadian stories, only it wasn’t by Merodach. It was by another “sun god” like Merodach named “Adar” whom I spoke briefly of earlier as nothing more than one of Cain’s mythological representations. He (Adar) also appears to be the “double” for Merodach in the inscriptions. Many would argue this by saying “why would Merodach have a double”? The answer is simple. It’s all part of “mystifying” the truth. Further proof to show that the “gods” spoken of in Akkadian mythology had “doubles” comes from this interesting fact noticed by Professor Sayce in which he says and I quote:
“In the Shepherd Tabulu however, we have the double of the shepherd Tammuz himself”. (Hibbert Lectures page 212)
Thus, if Tammuz had a “double” it is very likely the sun god “Merodach" (Marduk) would have had one himself. Mrs. Bristowe (as well as myself) believes this “double” is Adar, one of the other great “sun gods” of the Akkadians. Interestingly enough, Adar slays Tammuz. Thus, connecting him with Cain. Another interesting form of proof that Cain told this story of Tammuz may lie in the very name “Tammuz”. Dr. Ball stipulates, the name “Tammuz” may well mean “hog or pig” as the Turkish language (which is similar to the Assyrian) uses the word “Domuz” to represent a “pig” and the word “Domuz” has been connected to the name “Tammuz” by certain scholars. Interestingly enough, in Greek mythology, Eve (Ishtar) and Abel’s (Tammuz) representatives “Demeter and Persephone” are shown together in one bust and Demeter is depicted as a kind of mother figure holding in her hands a dead pig, which seemingly represents Persephone. Who but Cain would write such a thing about Abel and insult his memory in this way?
One interesting fact that may allude to Cain’s “punishment” for murdering Abel in the inscriptions is while in the middle of all the polytheistic inscriptions found in the Babylonian texts, there are still a few monotheistic inscriptions that have been found and are noted in Mrs. Bristowe’s book “Sargon the Magnificent” on pages 118 and 119. I shall now quote one of these inscriptions.
“The transgression I have committed, I knew not. The sin that I sinned, I knew not. The forbidden thing did I trample on. My Lord in the wrath of his heart hath over powered me. God who knew (though I knew not) hath pierced me….I lay on the ground and no man seized me by the hand. I wept and my palms no one took. I cried aloud and there was none that could here me. I am in darkness and in trouble. I lifted not myself up. To my God I referred my (distress). My prayer I addressed…how long O my God shall I suffer? How long O my God who knewest (though I knew not) shall thy heart be wrath? (Schweich Lectures 1908, page 23)
Could these have been the words uttered by Cain as he was in sore distress of mind and agony of spirit over his punishment for slaying Abel his brother? It sure seems like the words of someone who is really complaining about their punishment granted by a single God and not multiple “gods”. Could not these be the words of a desperate man who would seek to “rebel” against the authority of God for his current state of mind?
Another “version” of this same quotation seems to have been found also, however, it takes on a more “polytheistic approach” as the name “Istar” is mentioned within. I shall now quote this inscription’s translation by Professor Sayce:
“May God be appeased again for I knew not that I sinned.
May Istar my mother be appeased again for I knew not that I sinned,
God knoweth that I knew not: may he be appeased.
Istar, my mother knoweth that I knew not, may she be appeased.
May the heart of my God be appeased.
May God and Istar, my mother, be appeased. [Etc.]…
God, in the strength of his heart, hath taken me.
Istar, my mother, hath seized upon me, and hath put me to grief, [Etc.].
Clearly this is seems to take the approach of something Cain would have uttered. The fact that it’s author mentions “Istar” or “Ishtar” as “mother” whom I have showed earlier to be Eve defied is a clear elusion to Cain. Also, the fact that this author has the knowledge of a “God” is also another elusion to Cain.
In further study, it seems these same “gods” spoken of in the Akkadian stories who we have seen are nothing more than the stories of the early Bible patriarchs are told in other forms of mythology. Greek mythology is stated by many to owe its true origins to these stories for it seems Greek mythology arose out of Knossos, Crete and from historical studies at both Knossos, Crete and Cyprus, we see that the Babylonians were in Knossos, Crete and the Islands of Cyprus somewhere around 3,000+ years before the time of Christ.
One interesting form of this proof comes from the fact that the hematite cylinders typically found in ancient Sumer and Akkad (Babylon) have also been discovered in Cyprus and Crete dating back to 3000 B.C and possibly before. In Cyprus, multiple Hematite cylinders with Babylonian inscriptions have been found and it has been noted by many scholars that the use of “clay tablets” found in Babylon was apparently also used in Crete and Cyprus. Perhaps the most alarming form of evidence was found in Knossos, Crete. The name “Khyan” was found inscribed upon an alabaster lid of a coffer at Knossos. This name is equal to the name “Kian” which was found inscribed upon a Babylonian Lion that now sets in the British Museum. Both the names “Khyan” and “Kian” mean Cain for Cain in Hebrew is pronounced “Kayin” and at lasts connects Cain’s dynasty as Sargon the Magnificent to Knossos, Crete. Mrs. Bristowe even goes on in her book to show further evidence that perhaps the early art work and building found in the islands of Crete and Cyprus might indeed be the works of the descendents of Cain. Thus, after extensive studying one can safely conclude that the myths and legends of Greece probably were founded in Knossos, Crete and later made their way into main land Greece.
If Mrs. Bristowe is correct in connection Cain as being Sargon, that Sargon was then later deified into the great spring sun god “Merodach/Marduk”, and if this early form of mythology seems to have spread across the world, then this is of no small matter but of immense value. All over the world, we see “cultural heroes” who went forth in early time claiming their decent as “children of the sun” who have been responsible for early civilizations which explorers, archaeologists, and historians have been unable to account for. Interestingly enough, accordingly to W.J. Perry:
“In certain far off lands, the sun gods name was ‘Kane’.”(The children of the sun, page 167.)
Mr. Perry also went into great length to describe in detail these “children of the sun” and further states their presence is noted all over the world and in such places as India, the pacific Islands, Japan, China, Central America, and Peru (The Incas). It is believed that the founders of these great civilizations as well as their culture and myths came from either Egypt or Babylonia and Mrs. Bristowe notes in her book that most historic sources show that the great founders of Egypt seem to have migrated there from the Asia and as professor Sayce writes concerning these founders “it is probable that their first home was in Babylonia.” (The religions of Egypt and ancient Babylonia, page 22)
After reviewing all of this information, one begins to ponder upon a certain question. If Cain was, indeed Sargon the Magnificent, if his mythological representation was the spring sun god “Merodach or Marduk”, if he and his followers were responsible for the base creation of mythology, and if they are responsible for the spreading of these legends and myths, then why would Cain do such a thing? What could possibly have possessed Cain and his followers to be this way? I mean, we clearly understand from Genesis chapter 4 Cain was a murderer, but to go so far as to seemingly “erase” the God of the Bibles existence from the records, to desire to conquer and destroy other lands, and to desire to spread a corrupt version of the truth to deceive people over the whole of the earth clearly shows not only the mind of a murdered but an evil mind that seems to be very similar to that we attribute to the devil. The answer to the madness of Cain and his children may perhaps have been grimly hinted at in certain Babylonian inscriptions.
I shall now quote Professor Sayce yet again in the following quotation.
“Adar bears the same relationship to Mul-lil as Merodach does to Ea. Each alike is the messenger and son of the older god. But whereas the errands upon which Merodach is sent are errands of mercy and benevolence, the errands of Adar are those that befit an implacable warrior. He contents not against the powers of darkness, like Merodach, for the fathers whose orders he obeys himself is the ruler of the powers of darkness. It is against mankind, as in the story of the Deluge, that his arms are directed. He is the solar hero who belongs to the darkness and not to the light.” (Hibbert Lectures page 154)
Mul-lil as we have seen earlier is another name for Bel and Adar is, as I demonstrated earlier a simple “double” for the sun god Merodach who seems to be the deified form of Sargon (King Cain). Thus, in this notation Cain seems to owe his true allegiance in the form of “Adar” to Satan (Mul-lil) and not to his mother Eve (Ea). In this inscription we see also that the father of Adar is clearly Satan himself and not Anu (Adam). In case if you are not aware of it, there is a possibility from the Hebrew manuscripts of the book of Genesis that Cain was indeed not the son of Adam, but rather that of Satan.
This comes as a shock to most people and many regard it as a “ridiculous” or “preposterous”. After all, most grow up in a church where they are taught that Cain was the son of Adam. However, most Christians are unaware of a certain “flaw” that exists. This flaw has to do with the King James text. Originally, the Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. It was translated in 1611 to an English version that is known today as the King James translation of the Bible. Since it is not the original Bible, one ponders the thought of if there are translated errors within it. The answer is yes. If you don’t believe me, obtain a copy of an original 1611 King James translation, if you can find one and read the preface section. You will find a letter written by the scribes who translated the manuscripts into English warning you there were certain errors made. Now, that is not to say that the King James Bible is “completely flawed” or “of no use”. It is overall a good translation. Only a few simple errors exist here and there and in some cases the original languages are needed for a more precise translation. So that each person who reads this write up of mine has a full understanding of it, I shall go to the scriptures now and will be quoting from the Hebrew manuscripts in certain instances. To check me out, a Strong’s Concordance or Hebrew lexicon would be most beneficial.
Instead of starting with Genesis chapter 4 where the birth of Cain and Abel is explained, I’m going to start with Genesis chapter 3. The purpose? To set the stage in which Genesis chapter 4 is “built upon” if you would. In Genesis chapter 3, we see a story between Eve, The Serpent, Adam, and the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil unfold. While many people believe that the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil is but an “apple tree” and the forbidden fruit is an “apple”, you will not find the words “apple tree” or “apple” anywhere in the King James translation nor in the manuscripts. The reason? Perhaps while contrary to the “standard teaching”, maybe the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil isn’t really a tree at all. You will see what I’m talking about momentarily. That having been said lets ask a word of Wisdom from God in the name of Christ and begin.
Genesis 3:1 – Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, “Yea, hath God said, ‘Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”
I underlined the word “serpent” for a reason. Many people are taught this is a literal snake. However, the book of Revelation gives us another account of this “serpent”. Revelation chapter 12:9 and Revelation 20:2 both tells us “the serpent” is also called “The dragon, the devil, and Satan”. Thus, giving away his identity. The title “serpent” is merely one of the many titles for Satan. I underlined “subtil” because in the Hebrew the word is “aroom”, and it means to be “cunning or prudent”. Showing clearly Satan is wise and not a complete fool as some would have you believe.
I underlined the word "tree" for a very specific reason. In the Hebrew, the etymology of the word is very specific. It is the Hebrew word "ates" which means a stick or tree. However, its prime root is "aw-tsaw" which means, "to close the eyes shut". I wanted to present that fact because in this very study of this chapter, much information shall be presented involving "closing and opening of the eyes".
What should also be noted is the Hebrew word "aw-tsaw” is the base root to another interesting Hebrew word, "aw-tseh" which means a backbone or spine. I call this to your attention because the etymology of the word "tree" in the Hebrew can also be figurative of a person. Let’s continue.
2 – And the woman said unto the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
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 word “touch” is more specific in the Hebrew. It is the Hebrew word “Nagaw”. When properly translated it means, “To lie with a woman or to have sexual intercourse with”. Now, let me ask you a question. Can a human being have sexual intercourse with a literal tree? The answer of course is no. However, since we have seen the word “tree” can very well represent a person in the Hebrew, is it possible therefore for a human being to have sex with a “tree” if it is only a figure of speech representing another person? The answer is yes and it’s the only answer that will fit due to the order of the Hebrew here.
Genesis 3:4 – And the serpent said unto the woman, “Ye shall not surely die:
We know from Chapter 2 Adam was well informed by God himself if he was to partake of this “forbidden fruit”, he would surely die. Here however, we have old Satan himself saying the exact opposite and giving us documentation of Satan telling lies in the scripture. I point this out because telling lies seems to be the motive of operation Satan utilizes most. It’s also apparent it was a quality Cain and his children utilized very well. Much like Satan.
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.”
I underlined the words “your eyes shall be opened” to draw a comparison. Remember the etymology of the word “tree” in the Hebrew? Remember that one of its root words means “to close the eyes shut? Interestingly enough, here we have Satan telling Eve It’s ok to disobey God for clearly your eyes will be opened and ye shall know good and evil. Unfortunately for Eve, Satan is mixing a lie with truth here. Indeed, her eyes would be opened but it would be her flesh eyes that would open while her spiritual eyes would become closed. Thus, blinding her to the reality of what was happening.
I also underlined the words “ye shall be as gods” because the word “gods” in the Hebrew is Elohiym and although it can be translated as “gods” it is used in the singular sense here so it should be translated “ye shall be as God”. Naturally, only Satan would tell such a lie and attempt to place the imminence power of God into a human.
Genesis 3:6- And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
The words “pleasant to the eyes”, is a Hebrew idiom. It implies a sense of lustfulness. What should also be noted is what has previously been explained. Remember how I went to the Hebrew to tell you about the “opening and closing of the eyes”? Indeed her flesh eyes are being opened but her spiritual eyes are being closed shut in this event. The words “to make one wise” seems pretty obvious. Where do we as human beings obtain wisdom of the world? Do we receive it by means of “eating of a literal fruit from a literal tree”? Or do we receive knowledge from someone else? The answer is obvious. You receive knowledge from other entities, not literal trees. I’m sure this is leaving some pondering the possibilities and asking a certain question. “Well, if the tree of knowledge of good and evil isn’t an apple tree, and if it is a figurative representation of an individual, then just who is the individual it represents?
To answer this, we must first stop and ask ourselves some questions concerning the “Tree of knowledge of good and evil”. First of all, we know that God told us concerning this “tree” that if Adam and Eve were to partake of its “fruit” they would die as a result. Thus, the tree brings forth death. This tree also is figurative of an entity who clearly possesses both knowledge and wisdom, carnal wisdom that is to say. It is also the apparent opposite of the “Tree of life”. This brings up yet another question. If the Tree of knowledge of good and evil represents one individual, then who does the “Tree of life represent”? The answer is obvious. The Greek Septuagint uses the word, “Zoe” for the word “life” in “Tree of life”. Zoe of course means “life as in all living things”. Thus, the Tree of life is the source of all life. We also know from Revelation chapter 22 that the Tree of life is in the eternity and has “living waters” flowing from it. Do you remember John chapter 4 concerning the woman at the well and the words Christ spoke to her?
John 4:14 – But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
“Everlasting life” better translated “eternal life” from the Greek. So, if this “Tree of life” represents an individual, if it has the “living waters” flowing from it which are the same waters Christ said he and he only can give one to drink, and if it is the source of Eternal life then who is it? It is Christ. It can be no other. Then if Christ is the Tree of life, then who’s this Tree of knowledge of good and evil? It doesn’t take a sharp mind to figure it out. The Tree of live gives eternal life where the Tree of knowledge of good and evil brings forth death. Hebrews 2:14 states, that Christ died on the cross to defeat death and he that holds the power to death, which is the Devil. Thus, leaving the Devil as the answer to this question. He is indeed that Tree of knowledge of good and evil that seduced Eve in the Genesis. We also noted that this seduction was more than just “mental” as it clearly stipulates she put forth her hand and “partook of the tree” in the sexual sense from the Hebrew. Further proof of this appears in the New Testament in II Corinthians 11:3 where Paul stated, I would not have you to be beguiled as Eve was by the serpent.
The Greek word for “beguiled” is “expateao” in the Greek and it means, “wholly seduced”. We also note in Genesis 3:6 Adam partook of the same “fruit” as well. Whether or not he was seduced the same as Eve may remain a mystery. It is possible his seduction was different. Either way, from their involvement with The Tree of knowledge of good and evil (Satan), they became mortal and eventually died as a result. Returning to Genesis.
Genesis 3:7 – And the eyes of them were both opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
In this verse, we see the “eyes of them were both opened”. Once again going back to the “closing and opening of the eyes” discussed earlier. Indeed, they’re flesh eyes were opened for they had become mortal. I underline the words “fig leaves” because this right here is the beginning of the “parable of the fig tree”. If you don’t understand the parable of the fig tree, then put that off to the side for now. I underlined the word “aprons” because the word “aprons” means, “to girt the loins or genital region”. If a so called “Bible teacher” ever tells you Adam and Eve sewed leaves together to put over their mouths, they are clearly lying to you. Why would they cover their loins and genitals? Because that’s the portion of the body where the sin took place. Thus, they were ashamed of their nudity where as they had not been before. Nudity doesn’t bring shame, sin does.
Genesis 3:8 – And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden.
In this verse we see further proof to enforce the fact that sin brings shame. Naturally they realized they had sinned by disobeying Gods command and now they seek to hide themselves. I’m now going to skip on down to verse 14, where the punishments are handed out to the serpent and Eve as they tie in to the subject of the true identity of Cain. If you wish to read the rest, feel free to do so. I’m not going to cover it here for the English is pretty good on its own in verses 9-13 and thus, I’ll save some space and time for the reader who wishes to get straight to the point.
Genesis 3:14 – And the Lord God said unto the serpent, “Because thou hast done this, thou are cursed above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
Here Satan begins to receive his punishment. Many people teach that this is where literal snakes come from. However, we know the identity of the serpent. He is Satan. The words “upon thy belly shalt thou go” and “dust shalt thou eat” are Hebrew idioms for degradation.
Genesis 3:15 – 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.”
The word “enmity” of course means, “hatred or contention”. Thus, we have God placing a sort of contention and hatred between not only Eve and Satan, but “his seed and her seed”. I underlined those words “his seed” and “her seed” for a reason. The Greek Septuagint utilizes the Greek word “sermatos” here, which has the prime root “sperma”. I don’t think I need to translate what “sperma” means to you. It’s pretty evident just from its sound. It means, “male sperm” or “male seed”. This is the beginning of the teaching concerning both the seed line of Satan through Cain and the seed of Eve. We also see a sort of prophecy brought forth in this one verse. We see that one would come from the seed of Eve who would bruise the head of the serpent and would have his own heel bruised by this wicked seed of the serpent. This is the first prophecy in the word of God concerning the Messiah, Jesus the Christ. It would be these descendants of Satan through Cain who would ultimately carry out the crucifixion.
I understand many Christians feel that everyone is responsible for the crucifixion of Christ. For if it were not for our sins, there would have been no need for his crucifixion. Although on a spiritual level this is true, the immediate fact remains that not all carried out the crucifixion physically speaking. Nor did everyone in Christ’s time desire to see him crucified. We know it was namely those who stood in the seat of Moses and in the Levitical priesthood who desired his crucifixion. We also know it would take a person of a wicked heart to desire to see our own compassionate Lord and Savior suffer such a violent death. It was indeed the children of Cain who did set in the seat of Moses and in the Levitical priesthood who ordered for his crucifixion and thus bringing to pass this age old prophecy from right here in Genesis 3:15. Christ indeed would have his heel bruised by them but in turn Christ, through his death would defeat death which is Satan. Hebrews 2:14 documents that last fact.
Genesis 3:16 – Unto the woman he said, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
I underlined “thy conception” because this documents for us that a conception had already taken place at this time. It isn’t documented that Adam “knew” his wife yet. However, it is documented Eve had “knew” someone else already…Satan. Thus, further proof to show that she had conceived to him. It is also stated in this verse that Eve would bring forth children “in sorrow”. Naturally, God knew what was going to happen. Cain was going to be born and would slay Adam and Eve’s truly beloved son, Abel.
I’m not going to go any further into chapter 3 because the main reason why I came here was to set the stage and reveal the identity of Cain’s apparent true father. In summation of chapter 3, let’s review what we have seen. We’ve seen the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” is nothing more than a Hebraic figure of speech giving reference to the body and knowledge of Satan himself. We have also seen that Eve, as well as Adam fell to his seductive and persuasive ways and were brought to a sinful state. We have also seen from the Hebrew the true perverted and sexual nature of the actions between Satan and Eve and how Eve conceived to him in the Garden of Eden. What we did not see is the words “apple tree” or “apple” anywhere in this chapter. Nor did you see anything about them sewing fig leaves together to cover their mouths. This information we have obtained is interesting because in the Akkadian stories, Anu and Ishtar (Adam and Eve) are depicted with some sort of interaction involving a “tree” and a “serpent”. This same “tree” would later become the “world tree” found in all forms of mythology and thus, it is Satan who is the base power and source of knowledge in all mythology. Interestingly enough the “serpent” would always be considered a source of great knowledge and wisdom in other forms of mythology and even worshiped by other people. We have also seen there are two “children” or seed lines mentioned in this 3rd chapter of Genesis. The seed of Adam and the seed of Cain being those two gene lines presented.
In case if you’re not yet convinced that Satan was this “tree” in the Garden of God (Eden), I’m going to nail this down for you. I’m going to go to Ezekiel chapter 31 and lets read more about Satan where he is liken unto a “tree” yet again. In this chapter, God begins to detest the Pharaoh of Egypt. However, the “tree” described is not the Pharaoh. I’ll document this.
Ezekiel 31:3 –“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.
The word “Assyrian” is “TeAshur” in the Hebrew and it means, “a box cedar”. It is not the word “ashshur” which means “Assyrian”. There is no article “the” in the Hebrew and the subject was Egypt, not Assyria. So what we have here is a “box tree” or a “cypress” as it is commonly called trying to be a “Cedar of Lebanon”. The cedars of Lebanon were tall and strong trees and not a simple box tree like the cypress. Meaning it’s trying to be more than what it is. Typical Satan.
Ezekiel 31:4 – 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.
This is interesting. The Garden of Eden had a great deal of rivers running unto it to nourish its “trees” as well. Sounds a little interesting doesn’t it?
Ezekiel 31:5 – 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.
In the words “his height was exalted above all the trees of the field” is a classical reference to Satan. Remember how I explained back in Genesis 3 how the word “tree” in Hebrew can also be an analogy for a person? It is applied strongly here. The “trees of the field” are representations for God’s people. How do I know that? The “cedars of Lebanon” were always used to symbolize God’s people because of their great strength. This one “box tree” is shown here to have his height above all the trees of the field, giving reference to this one as placing himself above everyone else. Typical Satan.
Ezekiel 31:6 – All the fowls of heaven made their nest 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.
I would remind you that in the book of John, Satan is called the “king of this world”. Indeed, under his shadow many great nations have dwelt.
Ezekiel 31:7 – Thus was he fair in his greatness, in the length of his branches: for his root was by great waters.
These “great waters” keep reminding me of the rivers which flowed to the garden of God. That will be made evident in the next verse.
Ezekiel 31:8 – 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.
We finally see here where this tree was placed. In the Garden of God, this is to say, The Garden of Eden. This should further show the link to you between this tree here and the “Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil”. I underlined the words “his beauty” for a very specific reason. Many people are taught that Satan is this entity that has horns, flesh mangling teeth, and a pitchfork. That’s just isn’t so and it isn’t Biblical. We know from Ezekiel 28 that Satan as the “little Cherub that covereth” was full of beauty and from the Hebrew was made the full pattern. Is it any wonder Eve was so tempted to fall for his words?
Ezekiel 31:9 – I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: so that all the trees of Eden that were in the garden of God, envied him.
The words “trees of Eden” pretty much identifies this one “tree” as being the one that was in the Garden of Eden, that “tree of knowledge of good and evil” which is none other than Satan himself. I underlined the words “envied him” because indeed, at one point in time Satan was something that would be envied by most. We know again from Ezekiel chapter 28 how full of beauty and wisdom Satan truly is. Unfortunately, it was his downfall and some of that is hinted at in this chapter as well.
Ezekiel 31:10 – Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thou has lifted up thyself in height, and he hath shot up his top among the thick boughs, and his heart is lifted up in his height;
Here we see why Satan fell. His heart was lifted up in his height, meaning he thought he was something so special he could rise higher than the Lord. This is documented in both Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14.
Ezekiel 31:11 – I have therefore delivered him into the hand of the mighty one of the heathen; he shall surely deal with him: I have driven him out for his wickedness.
Here, we have some of the punishment of Pharaoh mentioned as well as Satan’s. The words “I have driven him out for his wickedness” is toward Satan as he was driven out of God’s congregation for his wickedness. I guess the lesson to be learned from this, would be this. Never allow yourself to feel that you are mightier than God. Despite how much power, beauty, fame, or wisdom you may seemingly possess, you are never Stronger than the Father who created you.
I’m not going to go further into this chapter as the main reason why I came here was to show further documentation of that Satan was indeed that “tree” in the Garden of God, that great Garden of Eden which seduced Adam and Eve. If you wish to continue reading the rest of this chapter, by all means do so. You will note that what follows is the pronouncing of Satan’s fall. I will caution you though that some of what is written is written to the Pharaoh of Egypt and the other to Satan. It is easily discerned though with careful reading.
I know one is probably curious about what I said concerning the children of Cain obtaining authority in the seat of Moses as well as the priesthood. Before going on to document the position of Cain’s descendants as obtaining power to the seat of Moses, I would first like to go to Genesis chapter 4 and show you more concerning Cain’s wickedness and how his wickedness would be passed on to his children. I will further show you that the sons of Cain would have interesting names and features that links them to this mysterious “Sargon the Magnificent”.
Genesis 4:1 – And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, “I have gotten a man from the LORD.”
I know the way this verse reads it’s easy to be lead into thinking that Cain must be the son of both Adam and Eve. However, you have seen the documentation from the last chapter that sets the stage for where we are now. The words “she conceived” does connect Eve with conceiving to Adam and bearing a child at this time. However, you’re going to find out that Eve was carrying maternal twins in her womb. That is to say, twins conceived at the same time but with two separate fathers. I know many believe that is impossible. However, if you ask a doctor, they can explain this to you. It is a fact that women have given birth to twins before with different fathers. I know this comes as a shock to some but be that as it may. I’ll try and document this for you from the Hebrew manuscripts. Cain would be born first and Abel would follow right behind him. I underlined the words “ I have gotten a man from the Lord” because it was Abel who she had received of the Lord, not Cain. To nail this point, lets see verse 2.
Genesis 4:2 – And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
The word “again” in the Hebrew is “yawsaf”, and it means, “to continue to do a thing”. What was Eve “continuing” to do? Well, it’s documented from verse 1 she was in Labor and gave birth to Cain. Apparently the labor continued here in verse 2. When a woman continues in Labor after giving birth to one child, what is she doing? She’s giving birth to twins. Thus she continued in Labor, and bare Cain’s brother, Abel. Thus, we have the two maternal twins born but each having a separate father.
3 – And in the process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
4 – 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:
5 – But unto Cain and to his offering He had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
Here is further proof to show the fact that Cain and Abel were born together for they both came to the age of bringing offerings unto the Lord at the same time. I underlined the word “firstlings” in verse 4 because this shows the difference in the offerings. Cain brought of the fruit of the ground but Abel brought of the “firstlings”, which is to say of his “first fruits” to the LORD. Meaning, he brought of his best whereas Cain did not. Thus, showing a sense of appreciation from Abel and a lack thereof from Cain. This would explain why God accepted Abel’s offering but not Cain’s. As a result Cain became “wroth”, meaning furious and angry in verse 5. As a result, “his countenance fell”, which basically means he came to the point of caring less about offerings to God. Here we see the true nature of Cain starting to show.
6 – And the LORD said unto Cain, “Why are thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 – If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”
Here in this verse, we see God’s sense of fairness. Even though Cain has a horrific origin, God still doesn’t discriminate against him for it. He clearly asked Cain, “If thou does well, shalt thou not be accepted?" Of course he would have been. Even the word “sin” means, “sin offering” from the Hebrew. All Cain had to do was give a true sin offering to God from his heart and Cain would have done well. However, we know Cain did not do well for what is about to happen.
Genesis 4:8 – And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.
The word “talked” in this verse is “amar” from the Hebrew and it means, “said” or better translated “Cain said unto Abel”. What was said isn’t included here. However, the Septuagint, Vulgate, and other sources do include what was said. The words were “Come and let us go into the field” which Cain said unto Abel. Thus, we see the act of premeditation for murder from the study and comparison of the manuscripts. Sure enough as it is written in this verse, Cain slew Abel. The word slew even means “murder” from the Hebrew. So here we have the first act of Murder documented in God’s word. Performed by Cain against his brother Abel. This same story would go on to be the foundation of legendary stories in mythology in which a “young shepherd” or “young warrior” always meets his devastating fate by a “giant priest-king” or “giant-god”. The prime example of this was when “Adar”, who I showed earlier as one of the deified forms of Sargon (Cain) slew “Tammuz”, who I showed earlier as Abel’s mythological representation. If it isn’t clear to you by now that Cain had a wicked heart, then the next verse should further show you how Cain bears the traits of his true father.
Genesis 4:9 – And the LORD said unto Cain, “Where is Abel thy brother?” And he said, “I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?”
Here is what I meant by one of the traits of Cain’s true father. He lied right to God’s face knowing very well that God knew what had happened. This is sheer arrogance and even evil. He then threw a type of jab upon it by saying, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Clearly this is not the action of a man who went a little astray. These are the actions and words of a man whose spirit conspires to do evil deeds. There is even an old Jewish tradition that teaches Cain was possessed by the devil when he murdered his brother Abel. I want you to ask yourself a question. If Cain was the servant and son of Satan, and if Cain was led by the spiritual influence of Satan to murder his brother, then what purpose would Satan have for doing such an act? Let’s think for a moment. Back in verse 15 of chapter 3, we know that the prophecy for Messiah was given. Satan was told it would be through the lineage of Eve the Messiah would come. Naturally, Messiah would not come through the polluted lineage of Cain. Thus, Messiah would come through the natural seed of Adam and Eve. At this time, Abel was the only carrier of that seed. Therefore, when Cain slew Abel, he attempted to destroy the promised lineage in which Messiah would come through. Thus, showing further proof of the allegiance and connection between Cain and Satan. However, Cain did not succeed for we know from later in this chapter and even into chapter 5, God would intercede and grant “Seth” to Adam and Eve to continue their lineage.
10 – And he said, “What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.
11 – And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand;
Here Cain is given the first portion of his punishment. The ground shall no longer reap fruit or bear its grain to his hand. This punishment also holds true for Cain’s descendants. This is why you will note further in this chapter 4 of Genesis they are “builders of cities”. They have to depend on the trafficking of goods in and out of cities for survival. Interestingly enough, Sargon and his children were noted for being “founders, conquerors, and builders of cites”. Now, I know earlier I stated that perhaps the great attribute of “farming and agriculture” that was attributed to Sargon links him with Cain and it still does. Just because the ground wouldn’t reap her fruit to Cain doesn’t mean he couldn’t teach the knowledge to others and thus the earth would reap her benefits to them.
Genesis 4:12 – When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth”.
Remember how I stated earlier that the name “Merodach” might come from the prime root “Marad” which means to rebel? That would be very befitting for such as “fugitive and vagabond” now wouldn’t it?
13 – And Cain said unto the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear.
14 – Behold, Thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from Thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.”
15 – And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven fold.” And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
Here we see that Cain had a mark placed upon him. The word “mark” is “Oth” in the Hebrew and it means, “omen or spiritual mark”. This also appears to me to be the “mark of the beast”. Many people believe the mark of the beast is some literal mark “on the forehead” that can be seen with the naked human eye. However, it seems the nature of the mark is more spiritual than physical and it clearly goes “in the forehead” which is to say, “in the mind”. It is the deception of Satan. If one has received it, it simply means, they are deceived. Cain carried it and so do his descendants for they are the carriers of “deception”. Especially when it comes to truth and God’s word.
Genesis 4:16 – And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD and dwelled in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
There are many people who believe that “Nod” was ancient Babylon in which is seems Sargon the Magnificent was ruler. Which does seem to further connect Cain and Sargon as being one in the same. They believe “Nod” is Babylon because accordingly to the Akkadian manuscripts, Eden was in the vicinity of “Eridu”, a sort of ancient Babylon province. However, there is the possibility that “Nod” is actually further East for there have been studies that the early lineage of Adam was positioned about the Taram Basin which would make east from there more near northern China or Mongolia. It should be noted that if this is true, it has nothing to do with the people of Mongolia or China. I say that cause I don’t want anyone thinking the people of China or Mongolia is Cain’s descendants. Either way, we know Cain’s ultimate fate seems to have been in ancient Babylon. Weather he went there or migrated to there later is unclear.
Genesis 4:17 – 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.
Many people are taught that this wife Cain took was one of Adam’s daughters. However, it isn’t documented in the word of God that Adam had any other children besides Abel. This leaves people wondering. Then if no women were born to Adam at this time, then where did Cain get his wife? There is a teaching that Cain married an ape and produced children from them. This is a lie and so is the teaching that Cain obtained his wife by taking one of Adam’s daughters. It is also a lie that we all came from Adam and Eve. It’s a fact from the Hebrew manuscripts that all the other races had already been created on the sixth day. I know many people don’t teach nor know this but I shall explain. If you go to Genesis 1:26 you will note that when God said “Let us make man in our own image” the word “man” is “aw-dawm” in the Hebrew and it means “mankind” and it is a plural creation. Whereas “Adam” in the Hebrew is “Et- HaAdam” and it means “The man Adam”. His creation is singular and emphatic as one in particular. Not plural as in the sixth day creation of “mankind”. I know this shocks most people and even offends some. However, this does not say that Adam’s race was anything “special”. The only thing than can be interpreted “special” about Adam’s race was the fact that Christ would come through him. This is why Adam’s race was so much of a focus in God’s word.
Here in this verse we see the beginning of Cain’s posterity. He is a builder and founder of cites. This further connects him with Sargon as Sargon too was noted for the “building of cites”. You will also find in closer study, this trait of “building cities” is employed as well by Cain’s descendants. This city named after “Enoch” in this verse has been identified as the city of “Erech” founded by Sargon, which I explained earlier. What should be noted is that in Genesis chapter 5, we see that Adam had a descendant named “Enoch” as well. It should also be noted these two Enoch’s are NOT the same entities. This is where our heavenly Father is trying to see if we’re paying attention. It has already been shown that Cain and his children had a type of “twisted version” of truth for their religion to deceive people. It also appears they took on the names of early children of Adam to further add to the confusion. Because of the similarities between the names of Cain’s children and Adam’s children, people are led to believe they are the same lineage. This is not so and one must keep this in mind as it serves an important purpose in understanding these children of Cain in God’s word.
Genesis 4:18 –And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.
These are some interesting names we are being presented with. The name “Irad” means, “fugitve” or “fleet” in the Hebrew tongue. Perhaps a reference to the type of individual Irad was. Perhaps he was a “rebel” just like his grandfather Cain. Methusael sounds similar to “Methusela” who was one of Adam’s descendants. The name “Methusael” means, “man who is of god” in the Hebrew. However, it doesn’t say “which god”. Perhaps it is the god “Bel” who is being referred to. After all, we have seen that Cain as Sargon claimed his descent from Bel. We also see here Cain had a descendant named “Lamech”. Interestingly enough, Adam had a “Lamech” in his lineage also. Our Father tells us of these similarities for a reason. That is to understand the similarities between the two genealogies but at the same time, note their differences. Are you paying attention yet is the question though? Are you watching and reading to understand the difference but still comprehend the similarities? I hope so.
19 – And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other was Zillah.
20 – And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such that dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.
The name “Jabal” is “Yabal” in the Hebrew and it means, “stream or flow of water” in the Hebrew text. There is only one letter of difference between he and his brother “Jubal” in the next verse. Interesting how we seem to have these “bal” endings. Remember “Bel” and “Baal” as we talked about earlier? This is further proof to connect them with being the sons of Sargon’s palace who were his priests that served Bel. We also see that this “Jabal” was one who dwells in tents and was such as have “cattle”. The word “cattle” in the Hebrew is “Miqneh” in Hebrew and it means “something bought” or “livestock”. Remember, God placed a curse on Cain so the ground would not yield forth its fruit to him. Therefore, he and his children would have to find other ways for survival. We’ve seen Cain as Sargon was a conqueror that founded and built cities and we see here one who used livestock for his trade and dwelt in his tent. This is perhaps the first traveling livestock market.
Genesis 4:21– And his brother’s name was Jubal: he was the father of such as handles the harp and organ.
Here we have Jabal’s brother, Jubal. His name means the same as Jabal’s, only Jubal is one who handles the harp and organ. The word “organ” is “oogab” in the Hebrew and it means a “reed instrument or panpipe”. Have you ever heard of the “pan god” whose body was half man and half animal and was noted for playing the panpipe? We have seen that Cain was clearly deified as “Merodach and Adar”. We’ve also seen the same thing seems to have happened with Adam, Eve, Abel, and Satan. Who else might have been “deified” into their memory being those of “gods”? Perhaps here we have yet the prototype for the pagan “pan god”.
22 – And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-cain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.
23 – And Lamech said unto his wives, “Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: For I have slain a man to my wounding, And a young man to my hurt.
24-If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, Truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.”
Now what kind of an individual is this? We see here he’s bragging about how he could slay a young man. This is clearly not the heart or mind of a servant of God either, but rather that of a murderer. He even goes as far to boast by saying “If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, Truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold”. This is a typical Kenite feature. It is in their nature to commit murder as their father Cain. I suggest remembering this and learn well from it. One interesting thing that should be noted is Sargon’s people were called “Akkadians”. The word “Akkad” may very well come from the word, “Akki”. Akki is a not just a word, but a name used to represent another pagan “god” in the Babylonian religions. Interestingly enough, this “god Akki has been identified as “Bel” whom we have seen earlier is Satan. Therefore, it is very much possible that if the word “Akkadian” comes from the word “Akki”, then the word “Akkadians” might very well mean “children or people of Akki”. Interesting isn’t it? Definitely something to think about.
Now, this is the end of Cain’s lineage in the book of Genesis. If you were to keep reading, you would note that Cain is not found in the lineage of Adam. This should serve as further proof to enforce the fact that he wasn’t Adam’s son. Although this is the last we see of the descendants of Cain here, it is not, however, the last we shall see of them in the bible. At this point, one begins to wonder, What ever happened to the descendants of Cain beyond this point? We’ve seen from history they seem to have been the early founders of Babylon but are they still there today or did they migrate elsewhere? Just how did their empire fall? It appears form the Babylonian inscriptions, the kingdom of Sargon fell to the armies of a man named “Shamu-abi”, which means, “Shem is my father” in approx. 2400-2200 B.C. It would be after this time the reign of the famous “Hammurabi”, would commence and the later Babylonian dynasty would be founded. It also appears the “Akkadians” which were Sargon’s people, seemingly fled from the land of Akkad.
Mrs. Bristowe in her book “Sargon the magnificent” notes she believes the descendants of Cain fled eastward into the land of China. However, there doesn’t seem to be any concrete evidence to this fact nor the does the Bible agree with this conclusion. Although Mrs. Bristowe was an excellent student of God’s word, it does seem she lost track of Cain’s descendants. This could be because when one looks for Cain’s descendants one looks for the term “Cainites” in the Bible. However, this is not the term used in the Bible to represent Cain’s descendants. To keep from confusing matters, the translators of the King James text used the word “Kenites” to represent Cain’s descendants to keep from confusing them with “Cannanites”, a word referring to the descendants of Cannan. Cain’s descendants, the Kenites are spoken of in God’s word and I shall document this.
To document Cain’s descendants and to show that Cain’s children are spoken of in God’s word and would come into priestly power after the fall of the Akkadians to the armies of Shem, we must go to I Chronicles chapter 2:55 where we are told the position of Cain’s children at that time.
I Chronicles 2:55 – And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.
I underlined the word “scribes” because the scribes were the ones who kept the record books and even volunteered to take care of the manuscripts. Makes you kind of wonder why certain historical records in the world are so confused doesn’t it? It’s a fact our people don’t like messing with books and records. Instead, they would rather hire someone else to do it for them. Unfortunately many times it’s an enemy who will volunteer to do it for you. In this instance, it is the “Kenites”. The word “Kenite” means “sons of Cain” when translated from the Hebrew. Thus, here we find their position. They’ve volunteered to keep the records of the people and to take care of the manuscripts of the prophets, which were entrusted to them. A BIG PROBLEM! I can look around the world today and see many translations of God’s word, which seem to have “slight errors” here and there and it really creates confusion. Makes you kind of wonder if it was translated incorrectly on accident or on purpose to create confusion.
Do you remember how you were told the names of the sons of Cain in Genesis 4? They were named after their father Cain and also, after their other father Baal! It would be these Kenites when they entered into scribe ship, brought the traditions and teachings of Baal (Bel) into the house of the Lord.
I underlined the words “house of Rechab” in this verse because it’s going to come up again in God’s word. To show an example, lets go to II Kings chapter 10 and we’ll pick it up with about verse 15. To set the state of what’s happening, I’ll inform you. We have Jehu, a great servant of God who’s been waging a holy war against Baal worship and the Baal priests. At this point in II Kings chapter 15 Jehu almost has everything under wrap sort of to speak. He’s got one last mission to fulfill and that is to ride to the head house of the Baal prophets and destroy the two golden calves created by Jereboam. These two gold calves were a prime source of the idolatry, which ultimately brought down the house of Israel. Unfortunately, Jehu isn’t aware of it, but he’s about to take the enemy into his chariot.
II Kings 10:15 – And when he was departed thence, he lighted on Jehonadab the son of Rechab coming to meet him: and he saluted him, and said to him “Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart?” And Jehonadab answered, “It is.” “If it be, give me thine hand.” And he gave him his hand; and he took him up to him into the chariot.
We know from back in I Chronicles 2:55 that Rechab was the father of the house of the Kenites at this time. Thus, Jehonadab, belonging to that house was a Kenite. Interestingly enough, Jehonadab was on his way out to meet Jehu. Typical Kenite. Always wanting to get in on the action and hear the what’s going on first. Notice how he responded to Jehu’s first question. “Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thine heart?” Jehonadab answered him by saying “It is.” Talk about a good ole boy greeting and speaking the right words. This too is a typical feature of the Kenites. They know how to “tickle the ear” with smooth words. Next, Jehonadab requested Jehu give him his hand to take him into the chariot. Sure enough, Jehu lifted him up into his chariot and took him with him.
II Kings 10:16 – And he said, “Come with me, and see my zeal for the Lord.” So they made him ride in his chariot.
Poor Jehu. Full of energy and good will but a little lacking in the intelligence department. He took this Kenite right into his chariot and then tells him “Come with me, and see my zeal for the Lord”. Now honestly, we can’t expect Jehonadab to really care all that much for Jehu’s zeal for the Lord. After all, he was a Kenite. The plan Jehonadab was forming was obvious from the start. He clearly came out to meet Jehu, not the other way around. It is interesting to note that Jehonadab knew Jehu was on his way, yet from the scriptures here, we draw the idea that Jehonadab and Jehu had never even knew of one another before this time. This is another typical Kenite trait. They always seem to know who the servants of God truly are and they are always aware when they are going to be passing by their path. Why ? Because the true servants of God carry the Holy Spirit within them and the Kenites seem to carry the spirit of "their father" with them. Just as the evil spirits in Christ time could sense him coming, so can the evil spirit of Satan sense the presence of the Holy spirit on a true servant of God. You never want to forget this.
Jehonadab then gives Jehu that good ole boy speech and asks for Jehu’s hand to ride in Jehu’s chariot. Clearly, he wanted in on the action. If you were to continue reading, you’ll find Jehu destroyed the house of Baal. He also eliminated all the priests that were there. However, its documented in the 29th verse of this self-same chapter, Jehu followed in the way of Jereboam and spared the two golden calves which caused this mess in the first place. Jehu was awarded his blessing and God promised to be with his children for the next 4 generations, however, verse 31 reinforces the fact that Jehu did depart from the Lord and went after the two golden calves. Because of this fact, you will see the Lord’s anger is kindled against the house of Jehu in Hosea chapter 1. Why would God be angry at the house of Jehu way over in the book of Hosea? Because of what happened here in II Kings. Jehu didn’t destroy the two golden calves like he should of. He even went on to continue worshiping them. Jehu was doing just fine till he took that Kenite into his chariot. After that, it was all downhill. The message? Be aware of whom your true enemies are and never let them in on what you’re doing or rest assured, your plans will fail.
EDIT: I found some typo errors in this report so I decided to fix them. I accidentally typed "Jehu" instead of "Jehonadab" in certain places. I apologize for this error and it was very faulty of me to not have noticed it until now. Again, I apologize.
Now, I shall go to the New Testament to document the position of the Kenites at that time. However, I think it would pay all well to go to Jeremiah chapter 35 and read concerning the “Rechabites”. Remember, we know that Rechab was the father of the house of the Kenites and therefore the Rechabites were of his lineage and his descendants. In that 35th chapter of Jeremiah, you will see that the true nature of the Rechabites as they always claim to do the will of “their father”. Without further ado, lets go to the New Testament and we shall begin in Mathew chapter 23:
29 – Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because ye build the tombs of the prophet, and garnish the sepulchers of the righteous,
30 – And say, ‘If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Here Christ tells us more concerning those “Pharisees and scribes” who persecuted him. He clearly tells you that the Pharisees and scribes were responsible for building the tombs of the prophets and how they swear if they had lived in the days of their fathers, they wouldn’t have partook in the blood of the prophets. In saying this, Christ pretty much tells you the lineage of who these Pharisees and scribes are. Now remember, we identified who the scribes were way back in the Old Testament in I Chronicles 2:55. We shall see here in a few moments that nothing has changed and the Kenites are still in sitting in the seat of the scribes. Before going further though, I would ask you a question. Do you remember when many of the prophets were murdered in the Old Testament? It was during the rule of Jezebel. Do you remember whom she murdered them for? It was for her god “Baal” and for her Baal priests! Do you remember what the children of Sargon (Cain) were? They were all high priests while they reigned in ancient Babylon. So we see not much changed. It should be all starting to tie together for you now as to how Baal worship entered into Israel.
Mathew 23:31 –Wherefore, ye be witness unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
Here, Christ further tells us the exact identity of these “scribes and Pharisees”. They are in fact the lineage of those who murdered God’s prophets for Baal.
Mathew 23:32 – Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
In other words they fulfill the works and measure of their fathers. Don’t worry. Christ is going to help identify who their “fathers” truly are shortly.
Mathew 23:33 – Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
I think Christ just identified one of their “fathers” in this verse. He clearly called them “serpents”. I would remind you of whom the serpent is. I explained and showed earlier that the Serpent is the Devil also called the Dragon and Satan. The word “generation” as it is utilized here is the Greek word “gennema” and it means, “Offspring or children”. Thus, Christ basically called them the offspring of children of The Serpent. I think that speaks for itself.
Mathew 23:34 - Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Indeed, God sent forth many prophets, wise men, and true scribes to these people. However, Christ told you the fate of many of those men as well as the future ones who would be sent of God. It is in the nature of these people to persecute and even murder the true servants of God. I can also tell you that the descendants of these Kenites do similar things even unto this date. Anytime a true man/woman of God appears to teach the true word of God, they will do whatever they can to make he/she look bad and to persecute them just as they did the Lord himself.
Mathew 23:35 – 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 ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Here Christ identifies to you their physical father. He told you they were responsible for the blood shed of the prophets from righteous Abel unto Zacharias. Let me ask you a question. Who murdered Abel? It was Cain! This leaves no room for interpretation or guessing. You were just told by Messiah himself the identity of these Kenites (sons of Cain). Isn’t it great to know our Lord never left us in the dark concerning these things? This is not the only place in the New Testament this is written. I shall give you a second witness to this. Let’s go to the book of St. John chapter 8. We’ll start out with verse 39.
John 8:39 – 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.
Here, Messiah is talking to these same scribes and Pharisees of the religious community we just covered over in Mathew chapter 23. We see here they “claim” to be of our Father Abraham. However, the Lord tells them differently. He clearly states if they were Abraham’s children, they would have done the works of Abraham. Naturally, we know murdering prophets and persecuting the Lord is not something Abraham would have done.
John 8:40 – 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.
In this verse, the Lord tells you their intentions from the start. They intended to kill him. We know the Lord was an innocent man. He only told us the truth yet for that truth, they sought to slay him. Indeed, they later on would.
John 8:41 – Ye do the deeds of your father.” Then said they to Him, “We be not born of fornication: we have one Father, even God.”
Notice the change here in the English text. Christ tells them “Ye do the deeds of your father.”, and the noun “father” is used with a lower case “f”. Not a capital “F” as when Christ refers to his “Father”. In this same verse, they also claim to be of one father, even God. Let’s see what the Lord says about this in the next verse.
42 – Jesus said unto them, “If God were your Father, ye would love Me: For I proceed 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.
Do you understand why they don’t understand the Lords speech or his word? It’s pretty simple. It’s not in their nature to know truth but to rather know “corruption of truth” as we have seen.
John 8:44 – 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.
When Christ said, “Ye are of your father the devil”, I don’t think it could be any more obvious to the reader. People will ponder these words and wonder what did Christ mean when he said them. He meant exactly what he said. Indeed, they are not of our Father Abraham but are of their father the devil. This is yet further documentation of the identity not only of these “Pharisees and scribes” but to the identity of their true father as well.
When Christ said He (their father) was a murderer “from the beginning”, I think that also links them to Cain as Cain was the first murderer in Genesis. Genesis of course means “beginning”. He further adds “their father” abode not in the truth and there was no truth in him. Indeed, we have seen that Cain as Sargon was not exactly the honest character now was he? Nor was/is Cain’s father Satan. Christ yet even further tells you “When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” Indeed, when Satan speaks a lie, he does speak of “his own”. Indeed he is also the father of lies as he was the first liar ever in existence.
Now, after reading all of this, it should be apparent to the reader that these “Pharisees and scribes” were nothing more than Kenites in disguise. Christ also told you the identity of their true father in these verses. We have also seen earlier how they came into their position of power way back in the Old Testament. The question is though, are they found mentioned anywhere else in the Bible? The answer is yes and there are multiple other places I could use to demonstrate this fact. However, I would like to go to the book of Revelation and show to the reader more about these “Kenites”. It shall be here more of their “identity” shall be divulged.
I’m going to Revelation chapter 2. Here, Christ is sending messages to the 7 churches of Asia. If you were to read both chapters 2 and 3 fully, you will note only two of these churches Christ was completely happy with. Those two churches are Smyrna and Philadelphia. Interestingly enough, these two churches are the ones who knew the identity of the Kenites and were persecuted by them.
8 – And unto the angel of the church of Smyrna write; ‘These things saith the First and the Last, Which was dead, and is alive;
9 – I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
The word “Jew” in the Greek here is “Ioudaios” (pronounced ee-oo-dai-os), and it has two meanings. One meaning is one who is a resident of Judea, which is the surrounding country of Jerusalem. The other is one who is of the tribe of Judah. We have already seen the Kenites were residents of Judea. In the scriptures of the Gospels, the Pharisees and scribes were often times called “Jews”. Now, this doesn’t mean they were of our brother Judah, however, it was a word applied to them since they were a resident of Judea. Here, In Revelations we have these Kenites again. Claiming to be “Jews” when they are not. Which is to say, not of Judah but as Christ has told us, but are of the synagogue of Satan. It should be noted that in later time, Historians and scholars have used the word “Jew” to represent, “the remnant of Judah”. Interestingly enough, there are seemingly two groups of “Jews” to this date. They each have heated debates with one another over “who is a Jew” and who isn’t.
7 – And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia write; ‘These things saith He That is Holy, He That is True, He That hath the key of David, He That openeth, and no man shutteth, and shutteth, and no man openeth;
8 – I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength and hast kept My Word, and hast not denied My name.
9 – Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
Here, we see the Church of Philadelphia was having the same problems as Smyrna for they were being persecuted by those which say they are “Jews” and do lie for they are of the synagogue of Satan. How great our Lord is that he foretold us all of these things so that we might have peace of mind and understanding. It would pay you the reader to take careful note of all that has been mentioned, especially in Revelations. The entire reason why these two churches found favor with Christ over the other 5 was because they knew the truth about those who claimed to be of our brother Judah and are not but are of Satan. If you do not recognize who that they are real and that they exist, rest assured, you’ll never know when one is in your midst and you will always stumble and fall like the other 5 churches mentioned here in Revelations. Many people will tell you that book of Revelations is untrue and that it isn’t meant to be studied. Yet, the word Revelation itself means, “to uncover or to unveil”. A revealing if you would. Without the book of Revelation, we would be at serious loss. We would not know the identity of the serpent nor would we fully understand the identity of his “children”.
In summation, let’s review quickly what we have learned. We have seen that the “Tree of knowledge of Good and evil” was none other than Satan himself. We also have seen the true horror and perversion that took place in the Garden of Eden resulting in the conception and birth of Cain. We have also seen how Cain with his wicked mind murdered his own brother Abel in an attempt to destroy the seed and lineage of Christ. It would then be Cain who was banished to the land of “Nod”. As we have seen, Nod may very well have been the land of Mesopotamia. It also seems apparent that Cain and Sargon the Magnificent were indeed the same people. The date given to Sargon the Magnificent by both the links between he and Alusharshid, as well as the date given him by Nabonidas clearly place him back into 3800 B.C and if not before. This matches with the Biblical dating of Cain because it is believed that Adam was created in the year 4004 B.C. and Eve was created soon after. At least this is the dating attested to by Arch Bishop Usher and most scholars. Thus, the birth of Cain and Abel could easily have been before 3800 B.C. and thus placing Cain into the same time period as Sargon. Sargon also was stated as we have seen to have an extremely long life since he allegedly held reign for 730 years on the throne, which matches the life of a Bible patriarch. It was also Cain as Sargon who invented false religion and mythology by deifying those around him into the form of “gods”. We see too that Cain as Sargon was apparently deified himself by his followers into the form of multiple “sun gods” and the worship of this “sun god” spread the world over giving rise to early cultural heroes claiming to be “children of the sun”. He also sought to eliminate our Heavenly Father from his stories as well. It also seems apparent that this form of “mythology” spread around the world. One of the greatest examples we have seen was in the Islands of Crete and Cyprus, which would give birth later to “Greek mythology” and we know that Greek mythology spread to the hands of the Romans and possibly the Norsemen as well.
We have also seen that Cain’s descendants followed in his footsteps with false religion and continued to allow the stories to spread and grow. We further seen Sargon’s armies apparently fell to the armies of Shamu-Abi. After this, Cain’s descendants were forced to flee and apparently took up refuge amongst the Israelites. Then, they would finally come into the power of scribe-ship amongst the priests. That being documented back in I Chronicles 2:55. We’ve also seen that in mixing amongst the priesthood they brought with them their false system of religion, which would eventually be the downfall of Israel. These “Kenites” would also be responsible for the slayings of the prophets and the downfall of many great men of God such as Jehu. They then maintained their priestly position as scribes and during the time of Christ seemed to have gained authority as “Pharisees”. They then were noted for the slaying of Zacharias as well as the persecution and crucifixion of Messiah. However, the good Lord warned us by spirit through Revelations they are still with us and they were responsible for the persecution of the two true churches of Christ, Philadelphia and Smyrna. They are also apparently still with us today. As Christ warned us, we are to know who they are but not to attempt to destroy them for in the process we will end up hurting and losing some of our own. We are only to recognize them for who they are and the false doctrine they carry so that we may not be deceived by it.
As the Children of the “price of this world”, naturally, the Kenites are not stupid people. They are very wise when it comes to the ways of this world and when it comes to deceiving people. It has been a practice in their family for thousands of years. To avoid them, we must use spiritual discernment and most importantly, the truth from the word of God. As I look around the world today, I see the influence of the Kenite. In many high places of learning, politics, finances, and religion, you will always note there is someone who claims to be a “Jew” involved. Now, that’s not to say they’re all “Kenites”, just some of them. They are there for a reason and that is to control the way things are in this world. You will be able to recognize them if you pay close attention to what they say and their actions. They will always in the end do the lusts of “their father”, instead of God.
In the end, I would like to say this has been a great pleasure for me to do this write up and to share this information with you, the reader. I hope you received a great deal of education and edification from this. I would also like to note if I have offended you, this was not my intention. I only teach God’s word and let the seed fall wherever it may. May Christ, and peace, be with you all.
Note: Those who are interested in this subject matter should take their time and read this write up multiple times and take as long as necessary to understand the material. For further information, I recommend Mrs. Bristowe's book, "Sargon the Magnificent". Much of the information I have included comes from this book. The book is somewhat short, but to the point. Not to say I agree with everything in her book, however, she gives great amounts of history in her support for connecting Cain with Sargon. Naturally, I agree with this theory and have extended her theory further in this write up with much Biblical information I have obtained from years of Study. I could have included more information had I taken the time to do so. However, I feel this write up is a great source of information to get one started into understanding the criteria. With that having been said, I thank God for the knowledge he has allowed me to understand what I know this material. It is indeed his knowledge, not mine. All praise and honor belongs to him, as I am only a servant.