Satan - part 1

(and but first Judas)

OK, decided to add another chapter to this study. Of course talking about angels and demons; we can't leave out Satan.

Now, who (or what) exactly is Satan?

I'd covered in Theories on the Origin of Evil that I hypothesized that "evil" was "the opposite reaction" to God's creative action. Being the manifest "reactive" opposite of everything God is not, in the material world. Seeing how we are talking about characteristics of a mortal temporal universe; "evil" does not bear the opposite of the Divine characteristics of the Creator. Evil is not omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, immortal or from everlasting to everlasting.

"Evil" if we'd analogize it to "dark matter", we'd have to say it's not a "conscience" any more than God's creative process is in and of itself a "conscience". The conscience behind the creative process is God. The creative process is not its own conscience. So Satan likewise would be the "consciousness" behind "evil"; seeing how "evil" does not possess a decision making consciousness to "do something". The only way "evil" could manifest its rebellious nature, was to infiltrate an entity with a consciousness. That entity was Satan.

It's important to understand that Lucifer was not "the creation of evil" by God. (God did not create a moral antheisis of Himself called "evil".) Lucifer was an entity created with a consciousness and a decision making process, just like all other entities God created with "brains"; (in the context of material life = a cerebral cortex that is large enough to accommodate the capacity to act independent of the will of another entity).

"Intelligence" I will define as: "The ability to make decisions independent of the will of another entity".

"Sentience" though, I will define as: "The ability to reflect on those decisions, as it relates to one's accountability before God."

The animal kingdom possesses "intelligence".

Humans and angels possess "sentience".

(As it seems also that God created other sentient entities, that we may know by Scripture's mention of ("beasts") or reasonably hypothesis the possible / probable existence of (extra-terrestrial life)).

Now… What was Lucifer created as?

Ezekiel 28:

The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying,

2) Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord God; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

Tyrus is the name of a Phoenician city. It comes from a Hebrew word which means "flint". It's most commonly translated in the context of a "knife" made of flint, or a sword that's "sharp as flint". So in other words "Tyrus" is a city that's "a knife of flint" which is "sharp as a sword".

The "sword of the Spirit" is the word of God. (Hang onto that thought.)

Note: This portion of the passage is addressed to the "prince of Tyrus". The next portion is addressed to the king of Tyrus.

3) Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:

The "prince of Tyrus". The "son of perdition". (Scripture names him as Judas.) He is described as "wiser than Daniel". Daniel was made to understand things others couldn't. Daniel was the main source of the information about the details of time wherewith people could identify the birth of the Messiah.

Yet no secret could "they" hide from Judas. In 1st century historical context the "they" are the leaders of Israel. What they tried to "hide" from him; he knew. Judas knew what Daniel couldn't know because Daniel was only given a shadow of the meaning of the revelation he received. Daniel had no "mathematical calculation" of "the time of the Messiah"; but he did have "When you see these things manifest; you know the "season" is here."

What were they trying to hide from Judas?

The fact that they knew Jesus was the Messiah.

4) With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures:

Judas got rich off this scheme. Scripture names him as "the purse keeper" of the ministry of Jesus. Scripture also says that Judas was embezzling the money he was entrusted with: thus the "gotten gold and silver into thy treasures.

"Riches" in the Scripture though is often equated with a belief in self obtained righteousness. They are "rich" in their own perception of their spirituality.

In Revelation 3, Christ says to the church of Laodicea:

17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and know not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eye salve, that thou mayest see.

Because the passage also speaks of "gold and silver"; I would not automatically conclude that the "riches" obtained (certainly of what was sought after) was only material wealth. We'll see this as we work through this passage.

5) By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

Now here is a really interesting verse; and I find it very intriguing that the King James uses the word "traffic". The Hebrew means "merchandise" ("goods" sold) and is only used 4 other places in the Bible (all in Ezekiel).

The first passage speaks of "spoil of riches" and "prey of merchandise". The second, third and forth we will get to, because they are used in this passage.

None of these references are as in sales of wares like selling clothing, pottery or even animals. They all entail a criminal element that brings about destruction of what is "merchandised". History would "legally" term it "slave trade". Today we would use the term "human trafficking".

So looking at what this means in context of Judas "prince" of the "king" of darkness as applied to this passage; Jesus was "trafficked" of this system that ultimately sought to kill Him.

"Riches" in this passage is the same Hebrew word throughout. It's translated in other places as: "army", "mighty men", "host", "valor", "strength", "riches", "power", "substance", "might" etc. It's defined by implication as what ever substance it is that's driving the person's power status. This also implies "support" of that power status (such as in the populous of a nation voting for someone, or the masses devotion to their ruler).

"And your heart is lifted up because of your riches". Judas believed he was important because who he had access to for the purpose of "trafficking".

6) Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God;

"Set" here means to "give" "deliver", "grant", "suffer" (permit). Judas abdicated his moral responsibility of what he knew was right in exchange for material wealth and the recognition of his "riches" (power / righteousness imparted upon him from the system) he thought he would receive in return.

"Heart" here is the intention and will of an individual; including their "moral compass". Judas here set his intent and will over God's intent and will. Or in the very least what Judas understood about God's moral character as expressed in the law.

7) Behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness.

"Stranger" meaning what is estranged from your sphere. What is foreign (in this case) to your sense of morality. What was foreign according to what had been taught by the law.

"The terrible of the nations" is literally "the tyrannical oppressors (plural) of peoples (also plural)". If we were to translate this into the language of Revelation; it would entail the aspirations made actions, of all Jewish and non Jewish actors worshiping the beast in the beast system.

"They shall draw their swords" (tools): "draw" means to "empty", "amend" or "pour fourth". Think "sword of the Spirit is the word of God". This is not specifically a reference to the implements of warfare; even though literal swords are a peripheral part of the picture.

"Against the beauty of your wisdom": "Beauty" implies purity "wisdom" comes from a root word "to be instructed" or "to be made wise".

"Defile your brightness": Defile here is an interesting word. The extended version of it means "to make weak". The root word is most often translated "begin" and subsequently translated "profane", "pollute" and "defile".

So psychologically and theologically they are "making weak" what Judas knew was the truth. He'd learned a lot from Jesus and those that he'd betrayed Christ to; twisted what Judas had learned to his own destruction. (Which was indeed the end result because he committed suicide.)

"Brightness" means "to show forth ones self as possessing understanding". Judas was not a dumb cookie. He was a useful idiot, but he was not a dumb cookie. He would be one such as like unto church of Ephesus in Revelation; one who can well articulate rightful intellectual knowledge of God and His salvation plan. This makes sense in context of Satan being the most knowledgeable theologian in this created universe.

(That's profoundly "heavy"!)

8) They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.

Basically what this verse is saying is that the final consequence amounted to: these "strangers" (the terrible of nations) contributed to casting Judas into the depths of the Lake of Fire. He "jumped off the bridge" in the same context that they "pushed" him. His pride (the glory he sought after; which was to be recognized as "the wisdom of God") brought him to the place where they were able to push him over the abyss; ultimately (his own pride) landing him in the Lake of Fire.

This gives a whole new nuance to Jesus's statement about "The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born." Matthew 26:24

Jesus understood the psychological factors pressing upon Judas, that were in play in this. "Pride goes before a fall." And it's profoundly notable when that fall is so far! (As is like unto be noted of Satan - which we'll get to in the second portion of this passage.)

9) Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.

"Will you yet say before Him (singular) who slays you; I am of the gods (plural)? But you shall be a man and not God (singular), in the hand of Him (singular) that slays you."

This verse is clearly delineating (by use of the singular noun "he") that it was indeed God the Father who slayed Judas; on account of him (Judas) setting himself up as one who came from "the gods".

The Goddess Phenomena:

Now the notion of Judas thinking he came from "the gods" is a bit confusing; because it seems Judas is giving ascent to the notion of polytheism; and of course the first thought we go to when we think of polytheism in relation to the 1st century is Greek Hellenization of the Jewish culture. Remember the "orthodox" pharisees believed the biggest enemy of their society was the culture of the Greeks. (See: chapter "Blood Libel" in Bible study - END TIMES?)

It wasn't Greek culture though. It was their own distortion of theology they brought out of Babylon. The roots of the Talmud started in the Babylonian captivity; (which actually hearkens all the way back to what happened on Sini with the golden calf after leaving Egypt).

The "Shekhinah glory" which is suppose to be the "feminine form" of where God resides.

The Jews believed this to be the physical temple; (place where the presence of God could be seen) yet the glory of God, as it related to God manifest in the material creation, was revealed to them in the male Messiah. God's glory isn't found in "His people"; it's found in His incarnation.

"Shekhinah glory" sprung a heresy that equated the presence of God to a "feminine" form. (For example; Proverbs describing "wisdom" in female terms. Song of Solomon has a male and female components to the story line of the book.)

If properly understood "the body of Christ" being the "church" is portrayed in feminine terms; but no where in Scripture does that equate to a feminine form of God. God as Spirit (Father / Son) is technically neither male or female. God the son was manifest male as the express incarnation of the image of God that Adam (and Eve) were created as. But because Christ never reproduced in the flesh; there was no incarnate "Eve" (i.e. feminine manifestation of God).

Jesus explained this as: "marriage is for the children of this world". The reason for this being death coming to reign as a result of the fall. Adam needed the ability to reproduce and that's why Eve was created from him. Note Eve was not an independent creation from Adam. God in "His" glory though has no feminine counterpart; because "He" is genderless. As He was manifest in the material world though; He was incarnated in the likeness of Adam. And this is why Jesus was the "Son of God" and not the "Daughter of God".

"Shekhinah glory" though also extrapolates into the notion of God (conveyed in Rabbinic teachings as "material" form) having a material wife. This hearkens back to "the queen of heaven"; which is a title Roman Catholicism gives to Jesus's mother Mary.

The "Queen of Heaven"; (Jeremiah 44) goes all the way back to the Sumerians, as well as having its current parallel in Roman Catholicism. (Remember Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees; which was the capital city of ancient Sumer.) The "Queen of Heaven (Ishtar) was the mother goddess and if we follow the ancient religion from Sumer, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, and eventually into New Testament / "church age" times; we see the "virgin mother" "gave birth to a son" "who was killed", mourned for "40 days" and was "resurrected". This was a "transition" so to speak, to a quasi-matriarchal format going back into prerecorded history; as most prehistoric societies were matriarchal.

Historically matriarchal religion goes back pre-flood. The origin of this, I believe is "sons of God" / "daughters of men" creating "nephilim" incident described in Genesis.

Now obviously non-carbon based entities the Bible calls "angels" don't have the ability to reproduce. Jesus explains this when He talks about the bodies of the saints in the new heavens and new earth. There are no husbands and wives because there is no use for gender as related to reproduction. Might saints be recognized by the gender we bore on earth? Maybe; I don't know? As per angels, when ever they are described as appearing in form that the material creation can see; they always appear as male humans.

So if angels (including fallen ones) can't reproduce; the "nephilim incident" is not demons creating composite human angelic hybrids. I went back and looked really carefully at this language in Genesis, 2 Peter and Jude; I came to the conclusion that these demonic entities with the cooperation of human males, inhabited these men apparently with the intent of exchanging the experience of sex with power. Creating "nephilim" / "giants" / "might men of old" possessing knowledge that God hadn't yet revealed to humans. They did this in exchange for some sort of worldly experience of having an orgasm. (The human offspring got the knowledge; the demon got the "sex".)

Now why would demons and Satan have this obsession with reproduction? Well, some interesting details about prehistorical human religion may answer that question.

I'd mentioned above that most prehistoric societies were matriarchal. There are female statues found in prehistorical settlements across the globe. They are often interpreted as goddesses and at least as history moves into written language cultures, they are named as such.

Now there are generally three themes to the "goddess" statues that run in threads across cultures and history.

1. Mother goddess - Statues and images depicting pregnancy and child birth. Many of these appear to have functioned as "fertility assist" stones. They appear to be jewelry (or maybe even domestic tools) with 13 notches in them. They were probably used as a type of calendar. There are 13 moon cycles in a solar year. Moon cycles bear a similarity to human female mensuration cycles. There are 30 days in (approximately) both. Day 12 to 13 is ovulation. Multiple females living in the same household will all eventually sync into the same reproductive cycle timing. It is a long standing belief that mensuration cycles sync to moon cycles. (Studies of modern societies don't find that to be true; if there was a greater correlation in ancient times; I don't know? There are a lot of factors of modern life that disrupt our circadian rhymes.)

2. Elderly hearth goddess - These were often "burial" stones. (They'd be kept in "cubby holes of "kitchens"; and probably represented deceased grandmothers or "spirits" of deceased mothers.) These do carry into written civilizations. There is some written records of what they are and why they were created. They represent the "keepers of the fire"; as elderly women were often responsible for the hearth.

3. Women represented as / or with: "birds", "cats", "cows" "the moon" and "snakes". Now here's where it gets interesting. These depictions become more abundant as we get into written history.

"The moon" (reference to reproductive cycles) was explained in a paragraph above.

"Birds", "cows" and "cats" have some interesting correlations in the Scripture. "Cats" are most often depicted as lions and correlated with royalty. (The female figures are sitting on "lion thorns".) "Cows" and "moons" (the moon is often depicted between the cow horns) usually depict some sort of "nutritional support" of the culture. (The cow headed female figure is breast feeding.) "Birds" are female statues associated with "winged creatures". In post 1st century depictions the "birds" (with exception of a single white dove) have been replaced with angels. "Snake" / "serpent" imagery often associated with the "circle" (of life, earth, time) "wisdom" or "good luck".

So, going back into the Bible as these prehistoric civilizations developed; we see Biblical themes in these religious carvings.

"Birds" = winged creatures. Going back to the "nephilim event" and the knowledge gained by man through this collaboration; the "winged creature" imagery makes more sense. (The most obviously accessible material representation being birds.)

"Cows" = golden calf. The first animal sacrificed by God to dress Adam and Eve was most likely in the cattle family. All the sacrifices of the patriarchs were all cows. So animal sacrifices involving cows was very common in even prewritten history.

"Cats" = lions. The first place in Scripture lions are mentioned is in relation to Judah. And here is where it seems to me the "lion throne" imagery comes from. Lions are mentioned in the book of Job. (Job and elements of the creation and the flood, were the first stories of the Bible depicted in the secular written record.) (Think "queen of heaven" sitting on the "lion throne". We'll get to that in a minute. I think they are connected.) "Satan going about as a roaring lion." (The source of this information.)

"Snakes" = Satan. That imagery is very clear from Genesis. And with this we see the "twist" in that the serpent in these prehistoric religions represents "wisdom". Eve ate the fruit because….. she wanted to be wise; as God was wise!

So it seems this secret knowledge these demons (winged birds) conveyed to these humans had to do with the "rulership of the lion". The lion is the material world representation of the coming Messiah who will restore His kingdom. "Satan goes about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour." Satan is the "angelic counterpart" to Adam. The Mormons say he's Christ's brother; which this concept is actually Satan's "Freudian slip" of the power, authority and dominion he wished he possessed.

Now speaking of "Freudian slips" and Satan. Here is what I think is behind the whole "demons want sex" thing. The attempt to corrupt the seed of Eve, to somehow pollute the Messiah's passage into the material world. But because only God can create life; Satan couldn't "do it" (impotence pun intended) without "help" from "Adam".

Now here in enters another venue that stems from this perversion. Jude 1:7 connects this "nephilim incident" reference to Sodom and Gomorrah. As in these demons "went after strange flesh" (a destructive utilization of this reproductive process reserved only for carbon based life); so do humans (convinced they "need" to engage with the "objects" of their lust); "changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things." Note the correlation to pagan religions in the idols they produce! They become corrupted, (the human equivalent of "the nephilim incident" excepting humans can be redeemed when these angels were "reserved in chains for the day of judgement") leads to the end result of homosexuality. Because Satan has not the ability to corrupt the seed of Eve to prevent the incarnation; demonic influences drive the sinful tendencies of humans away from even the possibility of bringing about children.

Humans turn to same sex encounters and eventually can go further down the road into things such as beastiality. Even in male / female promiscuity; the "biggest danger" is always seen as pregnancy. So same sex partners, one night stands, prostitutes and even children are seen merely as a means to an end. The end (from the vanish point of Satan's attempt to oppress) is to "corrupt the temple". To pollute the mind, emotions and body, is to despise the Creator; even if the human agent isn't cognizant of that motive.

And here is a simple way to tell the difference between what is: convinced they "need" to engage with the "objects" of their lust; ("changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.") and biological desire driven by genuine love, as pertains to a Biblically lawful heterosexual adult relationship. To what extent will the couple lay down their lives in the service of God for each other? That level of commitment does't come with behavior motivated by sinful intent. The want of the closeness that cleaving to another involves is not the sin, for one can always lawfully cleave unto God. This is what: "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." means. The end intent of whatever we do is to cleave to God.

Now as far as "Eve" goes in terms of cultural recognition of women; there is nothing wrong with "honoring the mother", because the "female person" is what bears life into the world.

The bearer of life is extremely important in God's creative economy; (as well as the symbolism of the spiritual reality of conceiving new life). "She" is the one "He/he" longs for and "she" provides "Him/him" much comfort in "His/his" cleaving to "her". (Who in turn "she" is comforted by being cleaved to.) God created "he" and "she" to long for each other, for the specific (and very material world reality" of fulfilling His salvation plan. Life begets life; and both components (as related to humanity) who bring that about in the material world, are equally "man created in His image".

John 17:

20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

So obviously given the spiritual dimension of the salvation plan; being infinite, God need not be male and female. He is whole (and always has been) just as "He" is.

So Judas, having been raised with a quite well involved education of the Torah; (according to this passage here in Ezekiel) had a quite solid knowledge of these teachings. And based on the description of him as being "wise"; he would have known the difference between the truth and the error.

Yet somewhere, he still believed he was "of the gods"; what ever that constituted in his personal understanding.

10) Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord God.

"Deaths" (…die the…) is plural. It is a multifold death. "In the day that you eat of it (tree of knowledge of good and evil) you shall surely die."

"…of the uncircumcised" - This word is most often translated uncircumcised, but is also translated "closed", "forbidden", and "unskilled" in translations other than King James. (Uncircumcised (unskilled) in lips, uncircumcised (closed) in hearing, trees existing in the promised land are "uncircumcised" (forbidden) to eat for 3 years.)

In this context (contrasting Judas's "wisdom" and "brightness"); he dies the deaths of the "unskilled", the "closed". This is of "much is required" of "much has been received". All of that which he had is taken away. All that he's learned came to the end of his own destruction and this is why Judas was "better if he not be born".

"Strangers" is the same as in verse 7; (those estranged from the truth).

"I have spoken it says the Lord God." - This obviously is a declarative statement, meaning what God says will happen. It is perfect tense and is considered by God to have been accomplished, even if it hasn't come to pass in earthly time yet.

Here ends the segment of this passage as pertains to Judas. The next chapter will pick up on the rest of Ezekiel 28, that's addressing the "king" (i.e. Satan).

It's rather intriguing how the strings of this entire historical narrative fit throughout history itself. I'd never realized until I started looking at it; how the same form of idolatry going back into prehistoric times is yet so "modern". Yet it makes sense seeing how all the "source material" that so twisted Judas came from Satan. Just as God's character is unchanging; ironically, Satan's actions are rather predictable.