Pope Leo XIII’s pontificate did indict the Kabbalah

By Timothy Fitzpatrick
May 3, 2021 Anno Domini

In Michael Hoffman’s latest book, he implicates Pope Leo XIII in a centuries-long conspiracy by the papacy to hermeticize the Church through infusion with the Jewish Kabbalah.

Leo XIII, a favourite of traditional Catholics, is guilty because he did not include the Kabbalah in his exposure of Freemasonry in Papal Encyclical Humanum Genus, according to Hoffman in his 2017 book The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome.

“Both the New Age occultist, the Protestant Fundamentalist, and the ‘conservative’ Catholic believe that the Church of Rome in the Renaissance period under study, was the nemesis of all that Judaism represented, when in truth it was the vessel into which Judaism poured its Talmudic and Kabbalistic sorceries and iniquities,” writes Hoffman. 

After these had been fully absorbed into the corpus of the Church at the highest levels, only then did  the Renaissance and post-Renaissance pontiffs mount their theatre of ostentious ‘persecution’ of Judaics, which was still so much of a charade that when Pope Leo XIII issued his encyclical contra Freemasonry (Humanum Genus, 1884), he scrupulously omitted all mention of the Brotherhood’s most virulent source of inspiration and direction, the rabbinic Kabbalah.”

Hoffman essentially accuses Pope Leo XIII of gatekeeping for the Synagogue of Satan and their gnostic infiltration of the Vatican, which Hoffman pins as beginning sometime in the 15th century, or even before (I will do a full review of Occult Renaissance in the near future).

Speaking further on Humanum Genus, Hoffman writes,

“…the encyclical constitutes a colossal act of misdirection…millions of Catholics have been misdirected away from knowledge of the true root of the masonic order.”

But Hoffman is incorrect that Pope Leo’s pontificate gatekept for the Synagogue’s foundational occult book, the Kabbalah (also, Cabala). Sure, Leo XIII may have omitted the Kabbalah by name from Humanum Genus, but he attacked central themes of Kabbalah via Freemasonry. Furthermore, under Leo XIII, the papal-approved Jesuit periodical La Civilta Cattolica specifically named the Kabbalah six years after Leo XIII issued Humanum Genus.

“Thus, the bonds that unite modern Judaism to Freemasonry are now evident, and ought to put to rest any doubts. The study of the so-called Semitic question, in France, in Germany, in Italy, and elsewhere, once only able to be seen in the light of shadows, inscrutable, has now come out of the shadows. It is now known how the Talmudic Cabala was introduced into the rites, the mysteries, symbols, and allegories of Masonic degrees…everything in Freemasonry is ordained by a Jewish Sanhedrin….” The Jewish Question in Europe: The Causes, The Effects, The Remedies, La Civila Cattolica, Vol. VII, no. XIV, 1890 (English translation)

Quite emphatic. It seems that any of Humanum Genus’ alleged shortcomings were certainly fulfilled in The Jewish Question.

A bust of La Civilta Cattolica editor Matteo Liberatore.

Now, one may argue that the Jesuit periodical, then edited by Matteo Liberatore, was speaking out of line with the Papacy; however, at the time of this periodical it was generally perceived as being a voice of the Papacy. Speaking of La Civilta Cattolica, Pope Pius XI wrote, “…from the journal’s very beginning, the authors set for themselves that sacred and immutable duty of defending the rights of the Apostolic See and the Catholic faith….”, while historian Richard Webster described the journal as reflecting the views of the Pontiff.

Lastly, Leo XIII had requested an outline of his Rerum Novarum (the Rights and Duties of Capital and Labour) from Liberatore, so clearly there was at least a professional relationship between the Pope and La Civilta Cattolica’s editor.

What seems more plausible than Hoffman’s thesis of gatekeeping is that Humanum Genus was placed as a stepping stone to the full truth revealed not only in La Civilta Cattolica’s The Jewish Question in Europe but also in Monsignor George F. Dillon’s The War of AntiChrist with the Church and Christian Civilization, delivered in Edinburg October, 1884, six months following Humanum Genus. It was later translated and renamed Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked As the Secret Power Behind Communism. The work, which was dedicated to Pope Leo XIII, devotes considerable time to exposing the Kabbalah (for example, in chapter VIII. Cabalistic Masonry or Masonic Spiritism).

“However, from the very beginning Freemasonry has had a kind of peculiar dark mysticism connected with it. It loves to revel in such mysteries as the secret conclaves that the Jews used to practise in the countries in which they were persecuted, and which were common among those unclean heretics, the Bulgarians, the Gnostics, the Albigenses, and the Waldenses,” writes Dillon.

The Irish Catholic missionary Dillon notes on page 20 in the original edition,

“The Jewish connection with modern Freemasonry is an established fact everywhere manifested in its history. The Jewish formulas employed by Freemasonry, the Jewish traditions which run through its ceremonial, point to a Jewish origin, or to the work of Jewish contrivers . . .”

Was Leo XIII gatekeeping when he had Dillon’s work published in Italian and in Rome at the Pope’s own expense? Hardly not. Pope Leo XIII signed a letter of endorsement for Dillon’s work, granted him the title of Monsignor, and made the him an official member of the Famiglia Pontificia (Pontifical Family).

If that weren’t enough to convince Leo XIII sceptics, consider that this Pope expanded on the Vatican’s book prohibitions (Index Expurgatorius) by going above and beyond Pope Pius IV’s previous prohibition on the Talmud and including with it “Cabalistic and other nefarious books of the Jews….”. Leo XIII’s revised index (Index Leonianus) was issued in 1897.

Hoffman may be correct that some post-Renaissance popes were double agents and/or gatekeepers, but it seems that, if true, Leo XIII was not one of them and was, instead, countering that infiltration of the Papacy, at least regarding Freemasonry, Jewry, and Kabbalah (Hoffman claims Leo XIII also gatekept for the usurers by not sealing up alleged loopholes for usury left by proceeding popes. Click here for my review of Hoffman’s book Usury in Christendom.).

Once again, we see with Michael Hoffman a tendency towards reductionism (see author Jude Duffy’s series on Hoffman) and apparent ongoing attempts to undermine the authority and holiness of the Roman Catholic Church. This is not to dismiss Hoffman’s overall analysis in the book of what he calls Hermetic, neo-platonic infiltration of the Papacy, but we will deal with that in my general review.


  1. Hoffman should really have gone back much further and focused thereupon. I cannot help but think the man is overt controlled opposition but if he isn’t he is assuredly, despite his specialized though myopic intelligence, an unwitting dupe and shill of unparalleled profundity. In many respects, Roman Catholicism has functioned in various manifest forms and contexts as controlled opposition for Esoteric World Jewry since its very inception. The foundational paradigms, doctrines, precepts, rituals, and dogma of Roman Catholicism represented, embodies, and implemented codified systemic processes which in actual fact were contrivances wholly as deviant to and disparate from, as well as even antithetical and antagonistic to, actual biblical scriptural texts and manuscripts and were embellishments whose origination is entirely rooted within “proto” or pre-Kabbalist/Zohar oral Babylonian occulted esoteric Talmudism but also derivative of Neoplatonism and Gnosticism which BOTH heavily influenced the thought of the so-called “Church Fathers” and are themselves ultimately contrivances due to their marked influence by antediluvian systems of Edomite and Canaanite Esoteric vile and perverted forms of Paganism. The Edomites and Canaanites are the genetic seed line “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” Race Of Cain and the vast systemic network of Esoteric Worldwide Cohered Jewry and its upper shadowed echelons of pinnacle elites, none of whom do any of us “see”, are entirely descended of this seed line. Christendom, in its organic natural law and order racial identity accurate to scriptural doctrine expression and implementation sense was persecuted out of existence by the end of the First Century A.D. All organized, institutionalized, universalized, denominational manifestations of Christianity since then, all of the “churches” and their human based hierarchical power structures and idolatry thereof are vile perversions of actual Christendom and actual Apostolic scripture and have been compromised as well as ultimately converted into wholly controlled by Esoteric Jewry tools from their very beginnings. It of course worsened with the successive progression of the centuries but the fraud, perversions, alterations, inaccuracies, distortions, embellishments, inversions, and defects were there as intrinsic to the foundational paradigms at their very outsets. The churches are all antichrist in my humble view. Look into the work of William Finck and Clifton Emahiser, please.

    1. Oh, boy another of these Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, are perversions of Christianity! What a load of nonsense!! And a true racist, harping on genetics!

    2. Also, your nonsense of Christianity being controlled by Jewry is another load of nonsense I’ve heard here and don’t care to hear again, seeing the so-called evidence is really thin air!

  2. **antediluvian systems of Edomite and Canaanite Esoteric vile and perverted forms of occulted (“satanic”, if you will) Paganism …

  3. ****the derivations of Gnosticism, which was heavily infused unto both Roman Catholicism and the Orthodox Churches, was entirely that of Alexandrian Jewry and of those intellectual classes pandered to and seduced by it and it is perfectly clear that Gnosticism was an early contrivance of spiritual, philosophical, and intellectual psychological warfare implementation against Christendom and expressly intended to confuse, pervert, contaminate, and subvert it.

    1. LOL. Again, what a load of nonsense!!!! It’s very ironic to say that when St. Irenaeus fought and defeated Gnosticism. To accuse Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy of Gnosticism is the very height of absurdity! Your so-called gurus are nothing more than hacks!

      1. Gnosticism had many manifest and metamorphosed forms. It’s not simply one dynamic and its influences upon roman Catholic derived foundational precepts of thought and doctrines are not all blatant. St. Irenaeus did not overturn and shift the occulted defects intrinsic to the very foundational paradigms of Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy. He attacked a symptom but he failed to address the defective and diseased foundational roots. Making “saints” of “men” is idolatry. The foundational paradigms, doctrines, precepts, rituals, and dogma of Roman Catholicism represented, embodies, and implemented codified systemic processes which in actual fact were contrivances wholly as deviant to and disparate from, as well as even antithetical and antagonistic to, actual biblical scriptural texts and manuscripts and were embellishments whose origination is entirely rooted within “proto” or pre-Kabbalist/Zohar oral Babylonian occulted esoteric Talmudism but also derivative of Neoplatonism and Gnosticism which BOTH heavily influenced the thought of the so-called “Church Fathers” and are themselves ultimately contrivances due to their marked influence by antediluvian systems of antediluvian systems of Edomite and Canaanite Esoteric vile and perverted forms of occulted (“satanic”, if you will) Paganism.

        Do some deeper research. You’re clearly a vulgar and discourteous moron and have clearly never done so and nothing you wrote disproves anything I wrote at all. Compare the Septaguint to the Masoretic texts. Compare the Greek of the Septaguint to the English translations and take into account word etymology and meaning of the Greek words as contextual the era when the translation was accomplished. They both have issues but the Septaguint is superior. At least it gets chronology more correctly. All commonly read English scripture is rampant with translation errors of profundity and inaccuracy and wholesale misinterpretations. Your Catholicism and Orthodoxy are egregious antichrist deviations from TRUE Apostolic scripture and were questionably influenced. Face the fucking truth. Proper study of scripture fully reveals it to be the history of a specific racial group and its “tree branches” and it is entirely about race and genetics.

        1. No, no, and no! All this is your nonsense of making all religions the same. That’s all there is to it. And your use of profanity and vulgar language will not stand here. You’re just the same as another guy here who pushed the same nonsense and got banned because of his treatment of his opponents. Race and genetics?!! You’re the one who’s in deep error, not Catholics nor Orthodox! Anyone who says everything is determined because of race and genetics is a fool!!!

          1. You’re not worthwhile to engage with on any level. Have fun.

  4. There are in the Bible, and it is evident throughout history, two races in opposition to each other from the beginning. These are the race of the Woman and the race of the Serpent as foretold at Gen. 3:15. The race of the Woman is represented in New Testament times by the descendants of Jacob-Israel. It was this branch of the much larger Adamic (Caucasian or White) race which was chosen by Yahweh for preservation (“salvation”) to continue His work upon the Earth. At the time of Christ there did remain yet other branches of the Adamic race: Ionian Greeks (as distinguished from Danaan and Dorian Greeks) and the Elamite Persians, for example, but since then all of these have faded into oblivion, or have at least lost their original tribal identities. The people of most of those lands are today not true Adamites. The people of northern Europe are descended from the so-called “lost” tribes of Israel, from which came the Germans and Kelts and Scandinavians, etc., along with the earlier immigrants to these coasts, coming mostly by sea as Israelite “Phoenicians”, the Danaan and Dorian Greeks, the Dardanians (Trojans) later known as Romans and Illyrians, and other smaller divisions. Yet it is scripturally and historically evident that a remnant of the other Adamic nations dwells among them. The northern European nations, along with some of the nations of southern Europe and Asia as they once were – before they were invaded by Arabs and Turks and Mongols – are the remaining “seed of the Woman”. These are the Nations and their kings promised to the Patriarchs (i.e. Gen. 35:11; Luke 1:77 and 2:32 et al.), and the remnant of these peoples are “the Anointed” collectively, as discussed here in Appendix A.

    The “seed of the Serpent” have primarily descended unto this day from Cain through Canaan (Gen. 15:19-21), Esau (Genesis chapter 36), and the Shelahites of Judah’s Canaanite son Shelah (Genesis chapter 38), which is evident from John 8:30-47, Matt. 13:24-30 and 13:36-43, Luke 10:18-20, 11:47-51, Rom. 9:1-13, and many other places in Scripture. The evidence for this shall be considered at length below. The Edomites, who had long moved into the post-deportation lands of Israel and Judah (i.e. Ezekiel 35:10), were joined to the Judaean kingdom of the Maccabees circa 130 B.C., for which see Josephus’ Antiquities 13.9.1 (13:254-258) et al., and Strabo’s Geography 16.2.34. Thereafter the Edomites, Shelahite-Judahites and other Canaanites had infiltrated and then usurped the institutions of the Kingdom of Judaea by the time of Christ, and this situation was the reason for the constant “division among the Judaeans” noted at John 7:43, 9:16, and 10:19 (see 10:26), and experienced by Paul not only in Jerusalem, but in his travels also, seen at Acts 13:45-51; 14:2-5 and 19; and 17:5-9 et al. Note that Luke said that the Judaeans of Beroia were “of more noble a race” than those of contention who were in Thessalonika (Acts 17:11). These contentious people were the jews from whom today’s jews are in large part descended, and so today’s jews are primarily the children of Canaan, and of Esau, and are the enemies of Yahweh, Yahshua Christ, and true Israel. There were also in New Testament times, and even long before and after that, as there are even today, descendants of the Serpent in many places other than Palestine and who do not identify themselves as jews, having no relation to the place. Among these are the Arabs, who have long ago spread themselves into Asia, Africa, southern Europe, and the former Soviet states.

    As it has been shown that ὁ χριστός, “the Anointed”, is an appellation which is applicable to both Yahshua Christ Himself and to the children of Israel collectively, it is just as evident that the Substantives (a Substantive is an adjectival or verbal form of a word, usually accompanied with an Article, which is used as a noun) ὁ σατανᾶς, ὁ διάβολος, ὁ ἀντικείμενος, and ὁ ἀντίχριστος, among others, are appellations applied to the descendants of the Serpent (i.e. Matt. 3:7; 12:34; and 23:33; Luke 3:7 and 11:47-51; Acts 13:4-12; Jude 6-13; Rev. 2:9; 3:9; 12:1-9; and 20:2 and 10). These as they appear in New Testament writings shall be discussed presently.

    ὁ σατανᾶς (4566, 4567), is “the Adversary”, with the Article. The word is Hebrew, for which see Strong’s Hebrew lexicon #7854. It appears in the New Testament on approximately 34 occasions.. At times the word’s usage is of a spiritual, or supernatural, being, but at times it is used of people here in the physical world. Synonyms for the word, which are Greek words, are ὁ ἀντικείμενος (480), “the opposition” or in the plural “those opposing”, found at Luke (13:17 and 21:15) and in Paul (Phil. 1:28, II Thess. 2:4; and I Tim. 5:14), and ὁ ὑπεναντίος (5227), found at Heb. 10:27.

    At Rev. 12:3-9 we find that the “great red dragon”, the “old serpent”, the “Devil” (ὁ διάβολος) and “Satan” ὁ Σατανᾶς) are all the same entity: that collection of “angels” which rebelled against Yahweh, and being cast out here on the Earth, are certainly found here from the earliest times. And so we have that “old Serpent” found here already at the creation of Adam, who seduced Eve and fathered Cain. Many may protest that Adam fathered Cain, yet such is only found at Gen. 4:1 (and not at 4:16 nor 5:1 ff.), which is a demonstrably corrupt verse as is attested to in sources such as The Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 1, p. 517, which says of part of Gen. 4:1: “I have gotten a man from the Lord”, that the actual Hebrew is rather unintelligible, and “the words are a gloss”. Before the Christian era, the Israelites of Judaea either knew that Gen. 4:1 was corrupt and attempted to repair it, or were actually in possession of a version of Gen. 4:1 which was lost before either the LXX or the MT came along. For in the earliest translations of Gen. 4:1 from the Hebrew, which are the Aramaic Targums, we find translations or interpretations of the verse as follows: “And Adam knew his wife Eve, who was pregnant by the Angel Sammael, and she conceived and bare Cain; and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like earthly beings, and she said, I have acquired a man, the Angel of the Lord” (Targum of Jonathan), or: “And Adam knew his wife Eve, who had desired the Angel, and she conceived, and bare Cain; and she said, I have acquired a man, the angel of the Lord…”. The idea that Cain was fathered by the serpent of Genesis chapter 3 is supported not only by the New Testament (i.e. Matt. 13:37-42 and John 8:41-44), but also by much of the Apocryphal literature, such as IV Macc. 18:7-8 (in the LXX), Wisdom of Salomon 2:24 (LXX), The Book of Enoch 68:7 (Lawrence’s verse division), The Protevangelion 10:1-6 (found in The Lost Books of the Bible and The Forgotten Books of Eden) and the book The Secrets of Enoch (ibid.), at 31:5 which says of Satan: “…therefore he conceived thought against Adam, in such form he entered and seduced Eva, but did not touch Adam”.

    The descendants of Cain, the Kenites (Gen. 4:16-24, 15:19 et al., as both Strong in his concordance and again The Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 1, p. 517 attest), can be traced through the Old Testament unto the jews of today, in part, as explained at the beginning of this appendix. We also see in Revelation chapter 12, that it is this Satan entity who seeks to destroy the child (Yahshua Christ) of the Woman (Israel), even as soon as it was born. Only Herod, the Edomite king of Judaea (for which see Josephus’ Antiquities 14.1.3 and 14.7.3, where it is seen that the Antipater of some of these passages was the father of Herod; 14.15.2; and Wars 1.6.2), attempted to slay Christ when He was born (Matt. 2:16-20), and so many of the conclusions reached here concerning the Edomite-Canaanite jews are greatly substantiated by this alone, although they can also be elsewhere. This conspiracy by Satan (the jews in this context) continued throughout the time of Christ’s ministry (i.e. Matt. 2:3, 12:4, 22:15, Mark 12:13 and 14:1, Luke 13:31, 19:47, 20:14-26 and 22:2) until it was accomplished at the Crucifixion, and further continued against the disciples of Christ, for which see Acts 4:5-22; 5:17-42; 6:8-13; 7:1 and 52 ff.; 12:1-23 et al. Compare the terms “race of the high priest” and “their own countrymen” at Acts 4:6 and 23 as they are translated here in their contexts.

    After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and the eventual acceptance of Christianity by the nations of Europe – the true dispersed of Israel – “Satan” was locked away in the pit for 1,000 years, or rather the jews were eventually separated from the civic life of Europe and banished to the ghettoes or to regions outside, such as Khazaria – later to be released and to deceive the Nations. This is the period which we have been experiencing in recent times, perhaps with the dawn of the so-called “Enlightenment” where world jewry gained considerable influence over the economic and intellectual lives of the seed of the woman, and especially through the so-called central banking system (cf. Rev. 20:1-8.) Further discussion of this is outside of the scope of this appendix, yet hopefully enough has been said that the coherence of our Bibles with all of history may be manifest.

    Connecting them to the serpent of Genesis, we see that John the Baptist called the Edomite jew Pharisees a “race of vipers” (ἔχιδνα, 2191), which is recorded at Matt. 3:7 and Luke 3:7. Yahshua had told His disciples: “I beheld the Adversary falling as lightning from heaven! Behold! I have given to you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and upon all the power of the enemy…” (Luke 10:18-19; cf. Rev. 12:9). At Luke 11:45-51 we see that it is a particular race, the Edomite jews and their fathers (11:47 and 48), who shall be held accountable for the blood of all the prophets, even from Abel. Here it is manifest that Yahshua must be speaking to the descendants of Cain: for only Cain could be responsible for the blood of Abel. We see in the Old Testament, in one of the few places that the identity of the perpetrators is specifically documented, that it was Doeg the Edomite who would kill the priests of Yahweh for Saul, when none of Saul’s other servants would do so (cf. I Sam. 22:6-23). It can also be argued that Jezebel (the daughter of Ethbaal [or Ithobaal], a pagan priest at Tyre who slew the legitimate king and usurped the throne, for which see Josephus’ Against Apion), who slew many of the prophets of Yahweh (I Kings 18), was also descended from Canaanites.

    This “enemy” of Luke 10:18-19 is mentioned elsewhere in Luke 1:71, 19:14 and 27, and 20:43, and Acts 13:10. Their origin is explained in the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares at Matt. 13:36-43. Yahshua Christ foretold the time of vengeance on this enemy at Luke 21:22-24, as Daniel had many years before (Dan. 9:26), and as Paul was later aware of (Rom. 16:20). The dispersion of the jews after the destruction of Jerusalem was NOT the diaspora of the children of Israel, which happened many centuries beforehand and after which only a small remnant ever returned to Judaea. Rather, the dispersion after 70 A.D. was that of the “bad figs”, the people cursed by Yahweh, for which see Jer. 24:9-10, and also Isa. 65:15; and Jer. 19:8-11; 26:6; and 29:17-19. If these Edomite jews were indeed the children of Yahweh, they would not have been likened to mere husbandmen (Luke 20:9-16), but would rather have been heirs of the Kingdom with Christ (Gal. 3:29; Tit. 3:7; Heb. 6:17 and 11:9; Jas. 2:5). Yet the husbandmen shall be destroyed because they killed the servants (prophets) and the Son (Yahshua Christ) of the owner of the vineyard (Yahweh). These are the enemies who have rejected the sovereignty of Yahshua Christ (Luke 19:14), and there is no turning back for them now (Matt. 27:25, Luke 19:27, John 19:15). They would not, nor could they, repent or believe Him, even though one should rise from the dead (Luke 16:19-31).

    The Edomite-Canaanite jews are the fig tree of Matt. 21:19 ff., Luke 13:6 ff., which bore no fruit. They are the “sons of this age”, as opposed to the “sons of light” who are the children of Yahweh as related at Luke 16:8. It is they who force their way into the Kingdom of Yahweh (Matt. 11:12, Luke 16:16) and yet they shall ultimately be excluded from it (i.e. Luke 13:28). They are the bad tree which cannot possibly produce good fruit, opposed to the good tree, which are the true genetic Israelites who cannot produce bad fruit (Matt 7:17-18, Luke 6:43-44). These jews are a corrupt race which the children of Israel have been warned to keep themselves from (i.e. Acts 2:40); oppressive wolves (Acts 20:29) who would scatter and devour the sheep (John 10:12). Claiming to be Judah, they are truly “vagabond” descendants of Cain (Acts 19:13, cf. Gen. 4:14; Luke 11:52, John 8:44) and of the assembly of Satan, the Adversary (Rev. 2:9 and 3:9).

    διάβολος (1228) is an adjective, “slanderous, backbiting…as Substantive a slanderer” (Liddell & Scott [L & S]). In Luke it only appears as a Substantive and is rendered here “the False Accuser” with the Article, after the use of both the related noun διαβολή, “false accusation, slander, calumny…” (L & S), and the verb διαβάλλω (1225), “III. to traduce, slander, calumniate…to misrepresent…IV. to deceive by false accounts…” (L & S). So the rendering here intends to represent the full meaning of the word. In the New Testament it is manifest that ὁ διάβολος is a synonym for ὁ σατανᾶς. In the A.V. it was always translated “devil”, as δαιμόνιον (see below) also was. διάβολος was used to translate the Hebrew for Satan in the LXX, in I Chronicles chapter 21, Job chapters 1 and 2, and Zechariah chapter 3.

    The “False Accuser” of Luke chapter 4 certainly appears to be a supernatural being, yet this is not necessarily so, and I would only desire more information before reaching such a conclusion. Paul used the word in such a manner that it can refer to either the spiritual entity (see δαιμόνιον below), or to those members of the Adversary, the descendants of the Serpent already discussed at length above, for which see Eph. 4:27 and 6:11; I Tim. 3:6; and II Tim. 2:26. That Satan, the Dragon or Serpent, is also “the Accuser”, see Rev. 12:10 in the A.V., where the synonym κατήγωρ, a form of κατήγορος (2725), is used, and also II Pet. 2:7-12. At John 8:33, certain Judaean leaders professed never to have been in bondage. The Edomites could make such a profession, also being Abraham’s offspring, but the Israelites were in bondage several times: in Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon. Yahshua calls these men sons of their father the devil, or ὁ διάβολος.

    For examples of the behavior which the epithet “False Accuser” describes, which is quite an appropriate appellation for the jews, see Matt. 15:2; Mark 2:6-7; Luke 5:21; 6:2 and 7; 13:14; 15:2; and 20:19-26; Acts 6:13; 17:7; and 21:27-29 and 34-36. We have constant examples of such behavior from these same people in modern times, found in the false atrocity stories, false cries of oppression, insistence upon speech restrictions and “hate crimes” laws, ad nauseum.

    The word δαιμόνιον (1140) was also used by secular Greek writers – and I will conjecture that one’s interpretation of it is dependent upon one’s perspective – to denote “the divine Power, deity, divinity…” but also “a spirit, a being inferior to God…” (Thayer) and also in secular Greek writers cited by L & S “…an inferior divine being, a demon”. The word is derived from δαίμων (1142, found in the N.T. only at Matt. 8:31), which is “a god, goddess; an inferior deity…” (Thayer). Inferior or lesser “gods” are mentioned in the Old Testament at Exod. 23:32; II Kin. 21:3; Mic. 4:5; Psa. 8:5 where “angels” in the A.V. is actually the Hebrew word elohim (430) and should have been written “gods”; and at Mal. 2:11 in reference to the mother of Shelah, Judah’s Canaanite wife. Surely Mal. 2:11 supports the contentions here concerning the derivation of the Canaanites, which was in part from Ham, but in part from the Kenite descendants of Cain, son of the Serpent (i.e. Gen. 15:19-21). Jude refers to these as “the angels which kept not their first estate” at Jude 6, and Paul blames them for false religions at Col 2:18, evident also at Rev. 9:20. Note also I Cor. 8:5. As the Old Testament attests, and the New Testament verifies, the Israelites and all other Adamites are the children of Yahweh (i.e. Deut. 14:1; Psa. 82:6; Luke 3:38; John 10:34-36; Acts 17:28-29; Heb. 2:13), here it is evident that the other races – of which there is no record in Genesis that Yahweh created – are the children of these “lesser gods”, of the Serpent, and even though they often mingled with the blood of Adam (and do very commonly today), notably through Eve, Cain, Canaan, Esau, and Judah, among many others later, these are the “seed of the Serpent” and collectively ὁ σατανᾶς, or “the Satan”, “the Adversary”.

    δαιμόνιον is nearly always “demon” here, and it appears over 50 times in the New Testament. One time it is rendered “gods” in Acts, at 17:18, as seems appropriate in the context there. The verb δαιμονίζομαι (1139), “to be possessed by a demon or evil spirit” (L & S), appears 14 times in the New Testament, all of them in the gospels. The word δαίμων, of which δαιμόνιον is a diminutive, appears only once in the New Testament, at Matthew 8:31, where in the plural it too is “demons”.

    βεελζεβούλ (954) is mentioned at Matt. 10:25, 12:24 and 27, Mark 8:22 and Luke 11:15, 18, and 19, and is called the “Prince of demons”. There is a Baal-zebub in the Old Testament, found only in II Kings chapter 1. While in his Greek dictionary Strong tells us that βεελζεβούλ means dung-god (Gr. #954), he refers us to his Hebrew dictionary #1176 where finding the definitions of the component words baal (Heb. #1167) and zebub (Heb. #2070), the name apparently means lord of the fly. However zebul (Heb. #s 2073, 2083) is a residence or a dwelling, and so baal-zebul apparently means lord of the house.

    In New Testament writing, demons are equated with “unclean spirits”, i.e. Mark 7:25-26; Luke 4:33; 8:29-30; 9:42; Rev. 16:13-14 and 18:2 etc. Such an equation was also often made by the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Qumran sect, where it is evident that these “demons” or “serpents” were believed to exist on both the physical and the spiritual planes, yet are all of that same “satanic”, or adversarial entity. We find in the Dead Sea Scrolls references to “spirits of Belial” quite often, as in 4Q271 (4QDamascus Documentf) Frag. 5 col. I or 1QM (1Q33 or 1QWar Scroll) col. XIII. The word “Belial” in Hebrew is associated with the idea of something mixed, and is often used of people in the Old Testament, and at II Cor. 6:14-18, for which see Strong’s Hebrew dictionary at #s 1098, 1100, and 1101. The Scrolls mention the “spirits of Bastards” (those of mixed racial backgrounds) at 1QHa (1QHodayota) cols. XXIV and XXV, where they are also referred to as “spirits of wickedness”; at 4Q202 (4QEnochb ar) col. IV; 4Q204 (4QEnochc ar) col. V; 4Q444 (4QIncantation) Frag. 2 col. I mentioned with the “spirit of uncleanness”; 4Q510 (4QSongs of the Sagea) Frag. 1: “…all the spirits of the ravaging angels and the bastard spirits, demons…” and at 4Q511 (4QSongs of the Sageb) Frags. 48, 49, & 51 where they are equated to “impure sinners”, among many other places where they are mentioned. This is all rather consistent with the epistles of Jude and of Peter (Jude 4-16 and II Peter chapter 2).

    We also have in the Dead Sea Scrolls a comparison by the writers of a woman pregnant with a son, who in her pain gives birth to “a wonderful counselor with his strength”, to “she who is pregnant with a serpent…and the breakers of the pit result in all deeds of terror” (1QHa, or 1QHodayota, col. XI). Here the “spirits of the serpent” are also called the “torrents of Belial” and “schemers of the deep”, among other such epithets. At IV Macc. 18:7-8 in the LXX Apocrypha, a noble Israelite woman was recorded as having said to her children, comparing herself to Eve (from Brenton’s English): “…I was a pure virgin, and went not beyond my father’s house; but I took care of the built-up rib. No destroyer of the desert, [or] ravisher of the plain, injured me, nor did the destructive, deceitful snake, make spoil of my chaste virginity…” (cf. Gen. 2:21-22 and 3:1-15; II Cor. 11:3). Note Acts 13:10 and John 8:44. It was a very real fact to Yahshua Christ, to the early Christians, as well as to John the Baptist (Matt. 3:7, Luke 3:7) and the pre-Christian Israelites cited here, that there were living, breathing, genetic children of the serpent, devil, or Satan walking this earth and dwelling among us. The Bible tells us again and again just who they are, and what would befall us for refusing to recognize as much.

    1. And why am I forced to see nonsense from a non-believer who thinks he knows how Christians and Jews believed? This is what happens when the Bible is interpreted according to one’s fancy. All of it nonsense, to put it charitably. I have a lot of harsher words to use, but I will not use it here.

    2. Hey, James.

      Just want to thank you for putting in the effort to spread the truth about the Biblical Israelites and the message of Yahshua Christ. We may be far outnumbered by the stooges of the Edomite Christ-killers (like the troll attacking you), but in the end Yahweh will not be mocked. May He bless you and give you strength.

  5. James, if you’re think you’re worthwhile to engage with all the hogwash you brought up here, you’re delusional!

Leave a Reply