“And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.” Revelation 20:2,3 KJV (Underlines mine)

“Are you a man of mankind, a son of Adam, or a hu-man being and not of mankind, so not a son of Adam? Or, are you a son of Adam, or a son of the Devil through Cain, and does this whole idea shock you?” Messenger Charles Crosby, brother in Christ, from his post on the topic of Hu

Never heard of such things you say?

‘This is outrageous!’

‘What kind of world are we living in here?’

‘Do you really expect me to believe such absolute rubbish?’

I hear your complaints, but I’m afraid there’s nothing left for it then but to go on a little trip down genealogy lane to get to the bottom of these questions. Firstly, was there a genealogy of the Serpent? Secondly, is it alive and continuing today? With that in mind let’s get to it with a little more from Messenger Charles…

‘What kind of a word is ‘HU’? I’ve never heard of it,’ I hear you say.

Well its origin may surprise, for it is an ancient Welsh word, and ancient Welsh is from the even more ancient runic Hebrew tongue.

‘The English tongue agreeth with the Hebrew a thousand times more than with the Latin.’ William Tyndale, multi-linguist and early translator of the English Bible.

The Welsh are The Levites, with The Druids of Cornwall and Wales descended from The Levitical Priesthood, which administered life in Ancient Israel. This included responsibility for all religious, educational, financial and commercial activities in Ancient Israel; they administered The Tithe – a tax of ten percent on the people’s INCREASE, not the principal, so there was no Tithe/Tax on wages. Israel, during and after Joshua’s leadership at the time of The Judges was a free Theocracy under God, that is, before it became a Kingdom under Saul, David and Solomon and their tax slavery began.’

So just to sum that up ‘Hu’ is a word that connects us back to ancient Israel through the Welsh (and the Druids), ultimately to Jacob/Israel and his father Isaac, the patriarch of the Saxon people (Isaac’s sons; the Saacae): the Celts, Welsh, Dutch, Flemish, Gallic, Swiss and Nordic peoples.

Now, leaving aside your questions on proof of the ancient Welsh being the lost Levites, what does this word ‘Hu’ actually mean? Well, let’s just hear a little more from Messenger Charles on this and then we’ll follow that up with a few additional references to get our bearings on this most intriguing word ‘Hu’:

‘So who, or what exactly, is Hu?

Firstly,

“The Caduceus is one of the most ancient of symbols: You might best know this symbol as the DNA structure used by the medical profession. Since ancient Mesopotamia The Caduceus presented two serpents intertwined (the central nervous system) around a staff (the spinal column) with the wings (the “swan”) on either side (the two hemispheres of the brain, with the circle in the centre representing the pineal gland, or the central sun and psychic centre within). It also symbolised the kundalini energy… Biblical writers called The Healing Serpent Ne-Hu-shtan. The Hebrew word for serpent is “nahash.””

Secondly,  

“Their temples wherein the sacred fire was preserved were generally situated on eminences and in dense groves of oak, because a circle was the emblem of the universe; oval, in allusion to the mundane egg, from which issued, according to the traditions of many nations, the universe, or, according to others our first parents; serpentine, because a serpent was the symbol of Hu, the Druidic Osiris; cruciform because a cross is an emblem of regeneration; or winged, to represent the motion of the divine spirit.”

Thirdly,

“The Druids had a high veneration for The Serpent. Their great god, Hu, was typified by that reptile; and he is represented by the Bards as ‘the wonderful chief Dragon, the sovereign of heaven.

“The Serpent is universally esteemed a legitimate symbol of Freemasonry.” George Oliver, Freemason, Signs and Symbols, New York, Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, 1906, p. 36″

Lastly,

“The ancient god of the British Isles, called Hu, was the master of the dragon world.”

So we can see from these sources that ‘Hu’ is a name for serpent, and that the serpent was worshipped by the ancient Druids and is also revered by the modern Freemasons. The ancient serpent is still alive and kicking today on the logo of The World Health Organisation.

Now, there is much additional conjecture on this ‘Hu’ in relation to Wales but none of it could be justified to put in this post given the rather mystical and mythical nature of the material and the potentially wild claims being made. Nonetheless, just to get a bit more depth and detail on this ‘Hu’, here are a few other items starting with this piece on snake worship.

“Snake cults were well established in Canaanite religion in the Bronze Age, for archaeologists have uncovered serpent cult objects in Bronze Age strata at several pre-Israelite cities in Canaan: two at Megiddo, one at Gezer, one in the sanctum sanctorum of the Area H temple at Hazor, and two at Shechem. In the surrounding region, serpent cult objects figured in other cultures. A late Bronze Age Hittite shrine in northern Syria contained a bronze statue of a god holding a serpent in one hand and a staff in the other. In sixth-century Babylon, a pair of bronzer serpents flanked each of the four doorways of the temple of Esagila. At the Babylonian New Year’s festival, the priest was to commission from a woodworker, a metalworker and a goldsmith two images one of which “shall hold in its left hand a snake of cedar, raising its right to the god Nabu”. At the tell of Tepe Gawra, at least seventeen Early Bronze Age Assyrian bronze serpents were recovered.”

Next, we have this from Hu Ancient Chant:

“Chanting this word is described as going a step beyond meditation, “lighter than meditation,” more in alignment with “a contemplative or calming technique.” The Egyptian and Greek traditions of 5,000 years ago talk about the use of the word HU as a reference to God. Sufi saints of Tibet reference the word HU as being the originating sound of the universe. Druid history dating approximately 4,000 years ago and the Kabala also reference this sacred word. The Gnostic gospels (circa, 400 AD) refer to HU as being the true name for God. Even the Oxford English Dictionary in referencing the word “God,” contends that it can be derived from the Sanskrit word HU.”

Here is an interesting Wiki reference:

“Hu (ḥw), in ancient Egypt, was the deification of the first word, the word of creation, that Atum was said to have exclaimed upon ejaculating or, alternatively, his circumcision, in his masturbatory act of creating the Ennead.”

 Finally, here is a brief statement on the worldwide practice of Ophiolatreia.

“Ophiolatreia, the worship of the serpent, next to the adoration of the phallus, is one of the most remarkable, and, at first sight, unaccountable forms of religion the world has ever known. Until the true source from whence it sprang can be reached and understood, its nature will remain as mysterious as its universality, for what man could see in an object so repulsive and forbidding in its habits as this reptile, to render worship to, is one of the most difficult of problems to find a solution to. There is hardly a country of the ancient world, however, where it cannot be traced, pervading every known system of mythology, and leaving proofs of its existence and extent in the shape of monuments, temples, and earthworks of the most elaborate and curious character. Babylon, Persia, Hindostan, Ceylon, China, Japan, Burmah, Java, Arabia, Syria, Asia Minor, Egypt, Ethiopia, Greece, Italy, Northern and Western Europe, Mexico, Peru, America—all yield abundant testimony to the same effect, and point to the common origin of Pagan systems wherever found.”

Folks, there seems to be no shortage of material regarding ubiquitous serpent worship in ancient times; even the Oxford Dictionary says so! So where does all of this leave us then with the question “Are you a son of Adam or a son of Satan; a son of man or a son of the serpent?” Do such questions leave you dear reader completely flummoxed? What does ubiquitous ancient serpent worship have to do with Adam, Eve and the serpent?

Well, to cut straight to the matter, we’re now going to hear a little from a fellow named Jack Mohr:

“A hot argument is inflicting Identity Christianity today. It concerns the proper translation of Genesis 3:15, and gathers around a heathen philosophy which states that mother Eve was seduced by Satan himself, in the Garden of Eden and that the Jewish race came from this seduction and that this was what Jesus was speaking about, when He told the Pharisees in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil.

The key to SEEDLINE doctrine is found in Gen. 3:15, where God speaking to mother Eve and the “serpent” in the Garden, after the “fall,” says: “And I (God) will put enmity between thee (serpent) and the woman (Eve), and between thy seed, and her seed; it (woman’s seed) shall bruise thy (the serpent’s) head, and thou (the serpent) shall bruise his heel.” The main argument of the SEEDLINERS in this verse is that God is speaking to Satan, the fallen angel, who has just finished with his sexual seduction of mother Eve. But unfortunately, for their explanation, there is no indication that God is speaking to Satan. The Bible clearly says (Gen. 3:14) – “The Lord God said to the serpent (small “s” . . . because thou hast done this (whatever the act might have been), thou are cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.” No indication here of some super-natural beings, since the Word says God addressed the serpent as He would have addressed one of the cattle of the field. The word “serpent” as used here and throughout this chapter is #5175 in Strong’s Concordance – “nachash,” which simply means a “snake from its hiss.” If the word had been capitalised, it might have had reference to a non-Adamic person, but by no stretch of the most vivid imagination can it refer to Satan.”

Folks, that is the crux of it. Straight off the bat you can see for yourself that indeed the serpent need not be capitalised to be ‘Satan’ or the ‘Devil’ as indicated by scripture in The Book of Revelation:

“And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.” Revelation 20:2,3 KJV (Underlines mine)

So, here in scripture we have both the ‘dragon’ and ‘that old serpent’ not capitalised, and that is obviously because they are not the proper names used for the beast that was indeed, not a fallen angel but created by the LORD God:

“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?” Genesis 3:1 KJV (Underline mine)

Well, that’s two strikes for ol’ Captain Jack, but let’s give him another go just for fair trial:

“Let’s look at a few more “key” words in this verse: ENMITY – #996 – Heb. “biyn” meaning: “between; among; within. In actuality it has seven different meanings, only the three mentioned above can fit into this setting.’

SEED – #2233 – “zera” meaning: “fruit; plant; sowing time; posterity; carnally, child; fruitful; seed-time; sowing time”. It can very easily refer to children or posterity. The same word is used for the “seed of the serpent,” as for the “seed of the woman.”

But we find no indication here of who the “seed of the serpent” might be, racially speaking, if it is speaking of race here, which I doubt.”

Well, here just for your convenience, is what the dictionary has to say on enmity and please note, it was not too hard to find either:

So, we can see that Cain is not listed as being of Adams’ likeness nor Adams’ first born, neither is Cain listed in the genealogy.

“Adam, Sheth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalaleel, Jered, Henoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.” 1Chronicles 1:1-4 KJV

Now we also know that Eve was ‘the mother of all living’ because again, the scriptures plainly tell us so:

“And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” Genesis 3:20 KJV

So, perhaps Captain Jack is just determined for some reason or other, as are many people today, to dismiss such ideas of Eve and the ‘serpent’ as utterly wild nonsense? (Strange, given all the other wild nonsense people have had blasted at them for so long.) Yet, how utterly bizarre it seems in the case of Jack Mohr for he has elsewhere lamented the very thing!

“It must begin with the destruction of the moral and spiritual foundations which have made our countries great. In America, this plan has been underway for decades, as we see the constant attack against the family unit, the subversion in our churches, where our worst enemy is glorified as God’s Chosen and where our education system and the media have joined hands in this godless venture.”

Yet, in the midst of the first Jack Mohr article we initially quoted, he also stated:

“The SEEDLINE DOCTRINE is a slam against the Israel people, and the purity of the blood line from Adam and Eve, since it accuses our mother Eve, the ancestor of our Lord, of being a prostitute of the worst kind. I refuse to accept this!”

Well, maybe it’s about high time Captain Jack and others stopped contradicting themselves and apologising and explaining away, and got their heads wrapped around the sheer magnitude of the fall of Adam & Eve, and the utter depravity and wickedness of the ‘serpent’ and his ways? Furthermore, perhaps it’s high time these people recognise that modern race mixing is just as perverted, just as much a type of fornication as that of Eve and the ‘serpent’. Eagles don’t mate with Owls, and Wolves don’t mate with Foxes. All the creatures of Gods’ creation stay within their respective bounds but modern man has no regard whatever for Gods’ creation and an utter mess he is making of it all!

At any rate, now that we’ve got that sorted we can attempt to get up to speed with Messenger Charles once more: Cain is a ‘Hu’-man, and Able is a mankind; hu-mankind and mankind. Cain is a ‘Hu’-man as his father was the serpent.

‘Now hold on a second here! Are you suggesting Eve had sex with a snake?’ I hear you exclaim.

Well, thanks for that question and no I am not suggesting that at all. You can see here for yourself that the word ‘serpent’ translates as ‘nacash’ (transliteration). However, you can also see here that ‘nacash’ translates (transliteration) as ‘divination’ or ‘enchantment’. Folks, the young, naive Eve was seduced by a sorcerer, an enchanter, not a talking snake. This is not a Disney movie. This is the real thing.

So, are you hu-mankind or mankind?

Well, that’s quite the humdinger question then isn’t it! How would one know? Well, one would have to determine what came out of Noah’s Ark. So on that note, let’s hear from Charles once again:

‘Now for those of you who think you are ‘quick on the draw’ and say: “Yeah, but all Cain’s descendants died in the flood, so you’re talking nonsense!” I will retort with: “All his descendants bar ONE!” Namely Noah’s ‘Mrs’, whose name was Naamah, and she was the sister of Tubal-Cain.’

Ok, I’m going to add in the relevant scripture on that here for you now:

“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. And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech. And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. And his brother’s name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.” Genesis 4:17-22 KJV

So we can see that Naamah was of Cain, but how do we know that Naamah, sister of Tubal-Cain was Noah’s wife?

“Eve, Sarah, Rebecca, Leah, and Rachel—the names of biblical matriarchs such as these have lived on long after they were first written down more than two and a half millennia ago. They are among some of the most common names still used across the world today. Within the narrative of Genesis they walked alongside their male counterparts and even took center stage at times. The name of one important matriarch, however, is conspicuously absent from the story found in the biblical text—Noah’s wife… The name Emzara for Noah’s wife must not have been widely accepted, however, because in later rabbinic literature she has a completely different identity. According to the midrash known as Genesis Rabbah (c. 300–500 C.E.), a collection of ancient rabbinical interpretations of Genesis, she was Naamah, the daughter of Lamech and sister of Tubal-Cain (Genesis 4:22).”

The expanded text from which this quote comes indicates a bit of contention on this subject and nothing conclusive, which means the answer will have to be determined from other evidence as the scriptures do not tell us definitively one way or another. (Let’s note that the principal source indicating Naamah as Noah’s wife is a Midrash from 300-500 years after the death of Christ, and this source doesn’t even cite the date as A.D!)

However, within this article I also found this choice nugget:

“THE TEXT DESCRIBES HER AS THE DAUGHTER OF LAMECH AND SISTER OF TUBAL-CAIN, A MEMBER OF A DYNASTY THAT ORIGINATED WITH THE INFAMOUS CAIN, WHO MURDERED HIS BROTHER, AND CONTINUED WITH ENOCH, HIMSELF A FASCINATING FIGURE WHO “WAS NO MORE, FOR GOD TOOK HIM”…”

Yes, because that just makes so much sense doesn’t it that God would take Enoch, son of Cain the murderer? I don’t think so. The scriptures make it pretty clear that it was Adam’s son Enoch that was taken by God:

“And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah: And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.” Genesis 5:21-24

So, obviously these people are either clueless or making up brazen (copper) lies confusing the Enoch of the lineage of Adam with the Enoch of the lineage of Cain and they think we’ll believe anything! (On that note, how many Jews to this day use this tactic of disguising themselves right under your nose using your names?)

Anyway, here’s more on Naamah:

“Four demonic mothers are mentioned in Jewish magical and Kabbalistic texts: Lilith, Naamah, Igrat and Machalat.  Only one of these, however, is dubbed the “mother of all demons,” and described as the mother of Ashmedai, the prince of demons. This would be the figure named Naamah—which happens to be a fairly common name among women in modern Israel… According to one midrash, Naamah was the wife of Noah. Another interpretation has her as the wife of one of his sons…  In the same midrash that mentions the marriage of Naamah, sister of Tubal-Cain, to Noah, the sages also give two seemingly contradictory origins of Naamah’s name. Some believed that the name was given to her because “all her deeds were pleasant [ne‘imim]” while the other interprets her name as “she would beat [min‘emet] on a drum to draw people to idol worship””

Ok, that’s fairly juicy info on this Naamah, yet once again coming from a Midrash of unspecified year. In this source, there is quite the wild and varying presentation of ideas around this Naamah gal and also reference to something called The Kennicot Bible, which I had never even heard of. According to this link it is from medieval Spain circa 1476. However, this fellow states it is from 15th century Reggio, Italy. In either case it seems to be a hard core Jewish text and given the political developments at that time in both of those countries who knows what motivated it and how accurate any of it is?

So, we’ll have to lay aside these sketchy sources and draw our attention elsewhere. With that in mind let’s get back to Charles.

‘OK, so all this was just fine and dandy until the flood waters subsided and Noah started his new farming and agricultural (husbandry) lifestyle, which included the planting of a vineyard. We are then fast-forwarded to the scene of Noah having harvested his grapes and bottled up his wine, so he thinks he’ll have a good old wine tasting evening. Unfortunately, he gets a bit carried away with the tasting of the wine and ends up blotto. No doubt the rest of his family were also partakers of this first year’s growth celebration and were a bit tipsy. Moreover, whilst all the celebrating is going on Noah crashes out and Ham, his second son, gets into a strange incestuous relationship with his mother and, presumably whilst under the influence of Noah’s wine, he lies with her and sees his father’s nakedness.’

Ok, here are the relevant scriptures on that:

“The nakedness of thy father’s wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father’s nakedness.” Leviticus 18:8 KJV

“And the man that lieth with his father’s wife hath uncovered his father’s nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Leviticus 20:11 KJV

So folks, if you were living with your two brothers and your sisters-in-law (or if you are a female reader your sisters and brothers-in-law), on your 10 acre family compound, raising your livestock and growing your crops generally enjoying the new prosperity in the post-flood world and your father/father-in-law suggested it was time to put the work down and come try the new wine, what would you think if a few hours later you looked in his tent and found your brother getting it on with your mom, or your husband or brother-in-law with your mother-in-law as the case may have been? Witchcraft? Something wicked? Does that sound like something Noah that was ‘perfect in his generations’ would do? If not, would his wife do it if she were cut from the same cloth? So, I think we can run with this Cainite gal Naamah as Noah’s wife. Noah never knowing his wife again most likely confirms that for us. Nor, should we discount the obvious, which, is that Noah cursed the child ‘Canaan’.

“And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” Genesis 9:24, 25 KJV

So, here we can se that Ham had clearly done something to Noah (Does seeing one’s father passed out naked really constitute doing something to someone?) As for the name ‘Canaan’ itself, it is probably our biggest piece of evidence that Naamah was Mrs Noah with the name possibly meaning ‘Cain again’, ‘wickedness of Cain’ or ‘out of Cain’. It is obviously a very ancient word as Noah spoke it. Personally, I don’t know if anybody really knows what it means, but here is a little information on the people that would descend of their patriarch Canaan, the Canaanites:

“The Canaanites are described in biblical texts as a people marked by severe wickedness, particularly in the context of their religious practices and societal behaviours. They were associated with idolatry, religious prostitution, sexual cults, and acts of human sacrifice, including the burning of children to the god Molech. (1) Their worship practices were considered among the most sexually depraved in the ancient world, involving incest, bestiality, and orgiastic rituals. (2) The biblical narrative emphasises that their wickedness had reached a point where divine judgment was warranted, with God stating that “the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure” before the time of Abraham, indicating a long period of divine patience. (3) This judgment was not arbitrary but part of a broader divine plan to cleanse the land of corruption and prevent the Israelites from adopting these detestable practices.” (4)

So, with that in mind let’s cut back to Charles.

‘Now the outcome of this illicit, evil union is the birth of Canaan, whom Noah curses. Now why did Noah curse the brat Canaan, and not his debauched son, Ham, and/or his wayward, slutty wife, wouldn’t that have made more sense? Yes to our carnal minds it would have made more sense, but not to God who sees things very differently from us, hence He sees strange flesh from incest as an abomination and likewise any inbred offspring from such an incestuous union as anathema.’

Now let’s just stop here a moment to repeat this last sentence for it is very important indeed:

“He sees strange flesh from incest as an abomination and likewise any inbred offspring from such an incestuous union as anathema.”

Notice too, and most importantly, that Charles has identified man’s carnal mind as a major stumbling block to understanding. Indeed. Charles continues:

‘Furthermore, it’s crucial that we understand what has happened here. In the births of his three sons, only Noah’s bloodline counted, but in this evil, incestuous affair it was Naamah’s Cainite bloodline that counted in Canaan and not Ham’s Adamic blood. This means that with the birth of Canaan, Cain’s bloodline was re-kindled post-flood through Naamah his mother – the line of Cain was reborn…’

Ok, let’s stop here again a moment because there is something not quite right with this paragraph; the language is confounding. It’s hard to fathom what is actually being stated as there is more than one idea being expressed.

Firstly, this wording is tricky because of the coincident language around ‘blood’ and ‘bloodline’: “Naamah’s Cainite bloodline that counted in Canaan and not Ham’s Adamic blood.” ‘Blood’ and ‘bloodline’ being used in the same sentence like this is problematic; are we talking about genetics (‘blood’), or are we talking about lineage (‘bloodline’), or both?

The genetic ‘blood’ reality is probably that there is actually a little hu-man in all of us, or at least there was post flood; we all descend from a union between a man of mankind and a woman of hu-mankind. Personally, I’m not up for dissecting the dispersal of Noah and Naamah’s respective genetic material in their three sons and no doubt there would have been different traits and characteristics coming from both families as there always are with children from any family. In fact, I know someone, which inherited ears from their great-grandfather (4 generations back), so that raises an interesting question: “Did they inherit something from someone further back in the lineage?” (Folks, by 12 generations there are 4,096 ancestors contributing to the newborn child so, racial stock matters!). More importantly,

“A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” Matthew 7:18-20 KJV

By their fruits shall you know them. This must trump genetics; this reveals genetics.

So, with regards to the particular genetics question, and let’s bear in mind that it’s our own carnal mind that is likely to be a stumbling block to understanding here, the three images below may help convey the likely genetic reality of the three lines that come from the sons of Noah and Naamah:

Thus, if we are discussing lineage, that is to say ‘bloodlines’, in the eyes of God the child Canaan was not Noah’s and therefore not of his lineage. Canaan was the first of the Hamitic Canaanites. So, because Noah was not their father, these Canaanites did not inherit any of the blessings that would have been bestowed upon Noah and his seed after him.

Also, it may well be that as Noah was not the contributing father to this child Canaan, that this child Canaan did not effectively get any of Noah’s blood, i.e. his genetic material; Canaan may well be genetic continuity of the lineage of Cain and ‘Noah’s blood didn’t count’. I’ll leave that for you to meditate upon.

“And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” Genesis 9:25,26 KJV

Noah’s curse effectively brands Canaan and his descendants as servants and outsiders not of the lineage of his own children nor their future descendants. Moreover, Canaan and the Canaanites descended of him would certainly have been in the running for carrying the curse of Cain.

“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. And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.” Genesis 4:14,15 KJV

Do we have any evidence of that?

This link will take you to a compiled list of expulsions of the Jews. Given the confusion over who the Jews are you’ll have to take the early ones with a pinch of salt, but it is interesting to note a couple of things. The Jews were expelled from England in 1290 under King Edward I and yet post-Reformation they have never been expelled from any Protestant lands; they have been free and clear to go about their business. The last expulsion of the Jews on this list is from Guatemala (Catholic), in 2014 and what was the official reason given? They were ‘expelled due to lack of contact with locals’. LOL! Folks, you can’t make this stuff up. So, do they carry the curse of Cain? Just for further reference, here is another nugget from a different Messenger Charles post that reveals they know it themselves:

‘It would appear, if this were the only verse in the Bible that had anything to say about this matter of the birth of Cain, and if the King James Version of the Bible were the only version of the Bible we had, that we would have to accept the fact that Adam was the father of Cain. You see, here is the problem; Adam was not the father of Cain! Not only are the ‘Jews’ of today not of Adam, but also they know themselves they are descended from Cain. Let’s see who the ‘Jew’ admits himself to be. In the Jewish publication ‘Liberal Judaism’, January, 1949, there is an article entitled, ‘Liberal Judaism and Israel’ written by one of their greatest and most renowned Rabbis, Dr. Abba Hillel Silver. Dr. Silver, writing about the then new State of Israel says: ‘…the third commonwealth of the Jewish Nation is thus an accomplished fact. The State of Israel exists. As a result the concept of the wandering Jew is bound eventually to disappear along with the term (galut) exile. All nations send forth immigrants to all parts of the world. People are continually moving from one country to another, and change their citizenship, but they are not regarded as exiles. This fact alone – the end of national exile for the Jewish people, as such — is destined to affect favourably the psyche of the Jew throughout the world. It will endow the Jew, wherever he lives, with a self respect and a sense of security, a normal tone, long-wanting in Jewish experience. For the curse of Cain, the curse of being an outcast and a “wanderer” over the face of the earth has been removed…’

Well, as regards carrying the curse of Cain with that I’d have to call ‘Bingo!’

I’d also have to say, in light of recent events that the case is not as open and closed as Mr Silver tries to make it out to be; the state of Israel may yet turn out to be totally without legal merit. (In point of fact, as I have already mentioned in this blog elsewhere, the real claim ‘Jews’ have to the land of Palestine, is that it was actually the land of Canaan, and home of the Canaanites before Joshua led Israel in.)

Finally, with regard to establishing the true Cainite identity of today’s ‘Jews’ we should look to a more important item on the list we’ve had a glimpse of with ol’ Captain Jack and that is perhaps the major plot of scripture:

“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.” Genesis 3:15 KJV

Now, obviously any number of people want to completely dissociate the pre-flood from the post-flood world as if they had no connection to one another at all and everything was just a nice, shiny, new, fresh start after the water subsided, but is that really the case? Or is that just more modern, ‘New Age’ wishful thinking? I have seen the ‘New Age’ hippies declare this kind of utopian optimism many times. I have come to conclude that they truly believe, as if it were their religion now, that thinking this way will produce the idealistic world they want; their thoughts are a firewall to any facts on the ground. They have the power through their own mental and emotional will to change the world and mould it in the image of their ideal. No god will stop them as there is no god, just epic stories from which nice ideas can be cribbed so that evolution can arrive at its’ natural conclusion through their concerted efforts. (If only they knew how much this rings of Nietzsche’s will to power philosophy!) This is apparently why moral relativity is so high among this group of former ‘christians’ cum ‘New Age’ boomers and hippies (mutated Christ-esque characters); they only see their idealism and nothing else will get in the way of that blinding philosophy they are certain must be the truth. Interestingly, many of them also seem to espouse a kind of crucify yourself to save the world mentality whenever situations get tense. Finally, I note this kind of idealism now pervades all the churches, rendering the scriptures just a bunch of archetypal myths from which any number of feel good conclusions can be drawn. Therefore, sticking to the facts of creation, history and scripture, enmity between the descendants of The Serpent (Hu-mankind), and the descendants of Adam (Mankind), is what we should be keeping our eye on. This is truly the major plot of scripture that is endlessly denied or buried and therefore largely unknown. Has this enmity continued in the post-flood world? Well, we can certainly see that enmity on full display in the exchanges between The Son of Man and the Pharisees. If you cannot, get yourself some glasses. Yahowsha The Anointed Christ states quite clearly they are not His people.

“The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true. Jesus Yahowsha answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.” John 8:13,14 KJV

“Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus Yahowsha answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.” John 8:19 KJV

“Then said Jesus Yahowsha again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come.” John 8:21 KJV

“And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.” John 8:23 KJV

“And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? Jesus Yahowsha said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.” John 9:40,41 KJV

This exchange continues in the next chapter 10:

“To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers. This parable spake Jesus Yahowsha unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.” John 10:3-6 KJV

“I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.” John 10:11 KJV

“I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.” John 10:14 KJV

Folks, if I may just take you back to Jack Mohr once again, in his opening remarks he made the following statement:

“…gathers around a heathen philosophy which states that mother Eve was seduced by Satan himself, in the Garden of Eden and that the Jewish race came from this seduction and that this was what Jesus was speaking about, when He told the Pharisees in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil.”

A Heathen philosophy? What are we to do then, parse the statement? If we dismiss the statement the Pharisees are of their father the Devil don’t we also dismiss the statement Yahowsha is The Son of The Father? Of course we do. Folks, we cannot be of two minds, carting around conflicting ideas on account of trying to support truly heathen, ‘New Age’ philosophies and politically correct doctrines. We have to get some truth under our feet!

In truth the Pharisees were not all Canaanites, for example Saul that became Paul. However, would it make sense that Christ was actually throwing a riddle at the Israelite Pharisees using this language ‘you are of your father the Devil’? You will have to come to your own conclusions but to my mind the language is all too clear; in this exchange Christ was talking to Canaanites and no one else. If He were addressing Israel He most certainly would have used more indicative language such as: ‘you have been swayed by the Devil’. No yes?

“An error which is not resisted is approved; a truth which is not defended is suppressed He who does not oppose an evident crime is open to the suspicion of secret complicity.” as quoted by Pope Leo XIII in Inimica Vis.”

So to sum up all that we have looked at we should be able to understand that there were in the pre-deluvial world descendants of the serpent (Cainites), and that they have a genetic and spiritual continuity (Canaanites), that are alive and well in the post-deluvial world.

Our living nightmare is that we have a people going about among us today, which are a stain that cannot be removed; that are the lineage of the serpent and carry two curses and that do the work of their father, which was a liar and a murderer from the beginning.

“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. And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.” Genesis 4:14,15 KJV

“And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” Genesis 9:25,26 KJV

“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.” John 8:44 KJV

More importantly for all sleepwalking sons and daughters of Adam out there, let’s get something straight. The scriptures are the story of mankind, the sons and daughters of Adam, and in particular the Israelites chosen to bear witness to Elohim (God), which created them and will be their only salvation. The scriptures are not the story of the Canaanite Jews; these are the adversaries, accusers, seducers, deceivers and otherwise subversive villains in the story.

Don’t believe it? Can’t stand it? Well, perhaps now would be a good time for one last visit with ol’ Captain Jack and his aforementioned juicy quotes?

“It may appear that this article was written in defence of the Jews. IT WAS NOT! I detest them as an International force. I know their leaders are the bitterest enemy of our God, His Son, our King, and of our faith. I know what their plans are for the takeover of this world, since they have clearly told us what they are, over and over again and I have eyes to see how they are carrying out these plans. Figuratively, I believe they are the special children of Satan and that as the Apostle Paul said: “They please not God, and are contrary to all men,” (I Thess. 2:15) But let us use care when we call them the literal, physical children of Satan, for we cannot prove this from the Word. (Strikethrough mine)

We know that as a race, they have the sly characteristics of the serpent. We know from history that they are the makers of war and brag about it. In 1918, Count Mensdorf, the Jewish Ambassador from Austria to England was quoted as saying: “We (Jews) won the war (WWI); we made it, thrived on it; profited from it. It was our supreme revenge on Christianity.”

The Jew, Marcus Eli Ravage, writing in the January 1928 issue of CENTURY MAGAZINE said: “We Jews are at the bottom of nearly all your wars; not only of the Russian but of every other major revolution in your history. . . We did it solely with the irresistible might of our spirit, with ideas, and propaganda.”

The Jew Oscar Levy, in the preface to his book THE WORLD SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION said: “There is scarcely an event in modern Europe that cannot be traced back to the Jews. We Jews today are nothing else but the world’s seducers, it’s destroyers, it’s incendiaries, it’s executioners.”

Well ol’ Captain Jack, Hu are you?