Was The Serpent Creature a Beast of The Field?

Introduction

Now this is going to be a very interesting article, and one that I had not been planning, for the subject matter only came to light a few days ago on the 14th November 2022. My earlier view on it was that the origins of The Adversary were just as Genesis 3:1 has it, that is, that The Serpent Creature was the most crafty, devious and cunning Beast of The Field that The Yahavah Yah had made, but as it turns out, I was duped by yet another corruption in the KJV Bible.

OK, so let’s get the crucial Scripture written here:

Genesis 3:1 (MCV) Now The Serpent Creature was more devious, cunning and crafty than any [Beast of The Field] which The Yahavah Yah (The Elohim) HAD MADE. And he said unto the woman (Eve), Yea, hath Yah said, Ye shall not eat of every ‘Tree’ of The Garden?

There we have it, or should I say there we have their gross deception, and how did I come to the conclusion that it is a gross deception? With GREAT difficulty, I can tell you that, for I have been working on this topic for several days solid, and without let up, because each and every way I turned I was stone walled when trying to make sense of the whole idea that this Serpent Creature was formed from the ground a physical living breathing creature, and yet at the same time supposed to be a spiritual creature with the ability to reason, walk upright and talk, that is, the Devil, and as we read in Revelation:

Revelation 20:1-2 (MCV) And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having The Key of The Bottomless Pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold on The Dragon, that Old Serpent, which is The Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years.

However, this past several days has not been wasted, for I have learned one or two other things, along the way, as you do, once you start Biblical word searches and studies. So the first thing I learned was that the word ‘Satan’ can nowhere be found in the Hebrew Masoretic Texts of the Old Testament. Each and every time it’s found in the English translations it has been mistranslated from the word ‘Adversary’, so Adversary is the word that should be written there, not Satan. I now believe there’s question mark over this word ‘Satan’ too, but that’s a subject for another day.

Moving on, I was next confronted in my searches online, by numerous sites ranting and raving about a pre-Adamic beast species, allegedly Negroids, that is, based on the erroneous ideas that: 1) the beasts of the field were two legged humanoid upright creatures, half hu-man and half animal, and not natural quadruped animals, and 2) that Genesis chapter 1 was a first creation, and Genesis chapter 2, with Adam and Eve, as a second creation – all 100% bogus, I might add. How do I know it’s bogus? Easy, and I’ll post just two verses here in order to prove my point:

Genesis 1:27 (MCV) So The Yahavah Yah (The Elohim) created man (Hebrew aw-dawm’ – Adam) in Their own image, in the image of Yah created He him; male and female created He them.

Genesis 2:7 (MCV) And The Yahavah Yah formed man (Hebrew aw-dawm’ – Adam) of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath (the spirit) of life; and man became a living soul – a living creature.

So were there two Adams and two Eves? Furthermore, if Eve was the mother of ALL living, that is mankind and hu-mankind, what progeny did these other Adam’s and Eve’s produce? (See link No. 1 below)

Genesis 3:20 (MCV) And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living (Mankind and hu-mankind).

The next problem I had was that of understanding how a brute beast of the field could scheme, talk to and seduce (beguile) a woman (see link No. 2 below). Some say that The Adversary entered or possessed a serpent creature thereby enabling it to talk and to carry out The Adversary’s dastardly deed, but that would mean The Adversary had not actually done it, and the beast was just a proxy. And let’s be clear, for The Adversary wanted his genes and DNA impregnated into Eve, not those of some dumb beast. So that rules out the demonic possession nonsense.

I then had the issue of The Yahavah Yah declaring His creation as good and very good, so how could it be declared as such if there was an evil beast of the field, as a part of that very same creation, roaming around like a roaring lion looking for innocent victims to devour?

Genesis 1:18 (MCV) And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and Yah saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:31 (MCV) And Yah saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

On top of this I also had this verse in the mix:

Revelation 13:8 (MCV) And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him (The Adversary), whose names are not written in The Book of Life of THE LAMB SLAIN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.

OK, so let me explain. If Yashua Messiah was The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, that meant that sin and evil HAD TO enter into the world or into the creation in order for this prophetic statement of Yashua Messiah’s to be true, and to come true. So when did evil and sin enter into the world or the creation? Answer: as soon as The Serpent Creature entered The Garden and seduced Eve = The Original Sin.

However, notice this important point. The Garden event didn’t occur until AFTER the creation was finished, and The Spiritual Serpent Creature had been made before the creation, so was not a part of it.

So, at this point, I began getting suspicious, and having already proven that Genesis 4:1 is a corrupted spurious verse (see link No. 3 below), why not Genesis 3:1 as well. OK, I am fairly sure that this is just a coincidence, but you never know.

Today, (17th November 2022) I came across a web page that proposed the idea that the heavenly Four Beasts (Living Creatures) of Revelation 4 had once been Five Beasts (Living Creatures) with The Adversary being the fifth, as one with the head of a Serpent, but who left his first estate in order to play around being a hu-man, as did the so-called ‘sons’ of Yah in Genesis 6.

Now this made sense to me, as he would not have been a part of the physical creation, so thereby not tarnishing it by being a part of it, and leaving the creation clear to be classified as good and very good by The Yahavah Yah. Let’s face it, as a heavenly beast he would have been a usurper from outside and not a part of the physical creation.

This now left me with the task of rewording the verse, so that it made sense and here it is:

Genesis 3:1 (MCV) Now The Serpent Creature was more devious, cunning and crafty than any Beast of Heaven which The Yahavah Yah (The Elohim) HAD MADE. And he said unto the woman (Eve), Yea, hath Yah said, Ye shall not eat of every ‘Tree’ of The Garden?

Another thing that didn’t sit right with me was the use of the two words ‘HAD MADE’ when referring to a ‘beast of the field’, when it should have read ‘had been formed from the ground’. ‘HAD MADE’ sounded a far more appropriate term in reference to the making of angels, when beasts of the earth were formed from the ground.

So there you have it, that Old Serpent was ALWAYS a spirit being and MADE crafty, devious and cunning by The Yahavah Yah, hence he left his first estate in order to pursue his evil career, but with the added ability to become physical and seduce Eve.

If any of you has a problem with the idea of The Yahavah Yah creating things evil, then Scripture will bear me out (see link No. 4 below):

Proverbs 16:4 (MCV) The Yahavah hath made all things for Himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

In Yashua Messiah’s name

Messenger Charles

1. Hu; Hu-mans; Cainites; Canaanites; The Serpent Seed:

2. Did Eve Have Sex With The Devil or Did She Just Eat Some Fruit?:

3. Genesis 4:1 Did EVE Really Say: “I have Gotten a MAN From The Lord?”:

4. Isaiah 45:7 (MCV) I Make Peace, AND CREATE EVIL: I The Eternal Do All These Things!:

The DUALITY YAHHEAD (Godhead)

The Duality Yahhead!? What Yahhead is that, I hear you ask? Well I’ll tell you straight, right away, They are not a mickey mouse triune yahhead (godhead), They’re not a Christadelphian/Unitarian/Judaic/Islamic monotheistic godhead and They are not a Binatarian yahhead (godhead) either, if that’s what you were thinking.

Now what is a Binatarian yahhead (godhead)? I’ve never heard of such a thing, again I hear you say. OK, so let me explain, a Binatarian yahhead (godhead) is a half-truth, so that means it’s a lie, just like the monotheistic mono-god and the trinity triune yahhead (godhead).

Binatarianism is belief in a Duality Yahhead (Godhead) that has been corrupted with Triunism and turned into yet another lying hu-man magical construct. This means that instead of a mythical yahhead (godhead) that is one in three and three in one, they have constructed a yahhead (godhead) that, like the trinity, it is one in two and two in one = total fallacious religious nonsense.

We therefore need to understand that The Yahhead consists of TWO DISTINCT Spiritual Beings who are and were NEVER at anytime one solitary spiritual being – a mono distinction that applies solely to The Adversary – The Serpent Creature, for he is the ONLY MONO-GOD. This means that The Duality Yahhead is very simple to understand, for we are told about Them right at the beginning in Genesis Chapter 1 verse 1

Genesis 1:1 (MCV) In the beginning Yah (H430 Elohim – plural) created the heaven and the earth.

There They are, in the very first verse of the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures: The ‘ELOHIM’, and the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’ is the plural of the Hebrew word ‘Eloah’ or ‘Eloha’. So if the Yahhead was ONE YAH, it would have read: “In the beginning Yah (Eloah – singular) created the heaven and the earth.” But it DOES NOT SAY THAT it says Yah ‘ELOHIM’ – PLURAL! MORE THAN ONE GOD – THE YAHHEAD, but NOT a triune yahhead! Please excuse the all-caps shouting folks, but shouting is very necessary at times, especially, for some stiff necked duped rebellious people out there who love to hang onto their nonsensical Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious myths, whether it be monotheist myths or triune myths.

From Strong’s Concordance:

God – H430 אלהים – ‘ĕlôhı̂ym el-o-heem’ – Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: – angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

Now pay attention to what Strong is doing here, for he is following a satanic monotheistic agenda and explaining away The Truth by introducing his own irrelevant intellectual nonsense into his definition of ‘Elohim’ “but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God;”

Moreover, ignoring his intellectual waffle, ask yourself this very pertinent question: Would a Bible scholar of Strong’s immense calibre, with his excellent knowledge of the Hebrew language, have not known of the word ‘Eloah’ or ‘Eloha’ and known its SINGULAR meaning, and also have known that ‘Elohim’ was the plural of that singular word? I will leave you all to answer that no brainer question for yourselves. (Take note, I have recently learned that Strong was a Freemason so great care MUST be employed when using his concordance for a certain agenda will be at work therein.)

OK, so we have established from the first verse of the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures that the Yahhead is more than one Yah and this is further confirmed for us in Genesis again:

Genesis 1:26 (MCV) (first part) And Yah (H430 Elohim – plural) said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness: (Emphasis mine)

Right, now is this erroneously claimed solitary mono-god speaking to himself? If not, who is he speaking to – the angels? No way, for I’ll tell you straight, the angels never created anything, and man is definitely not created in the image of angels. This means that if we take the Yah is one” nonsense, seriously, it must mean that their yah needs certifying, for he is hallucinating and seeing someone in his head that he is now attempting to hold a conversation with. Hilarious or what!?

Having said all that, I can now see all the monotheists jumping up and down, frothing at the mouth, and renting their clothes in true Moloch and Baal worshipping style, as they did in Elijah’s day, when their mono-god failed to bring down fire to ignite the wet wood around their altar, such is their delusional thinking. (See 1 Kings 18) However, not only that, but when I have finished this article the trinity dupes will no doubt have joined them in their manic heathen frenzy. Who said being a follower of Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ) – The Way was not good fun? LOL

Moving on, I will now quote a segment from one of my earlier articles which covers the prime and/or premier “identity of Yah verse in Deuteronomy”, and we all know it, don’t we? This verse is the verse that nearly all monotheists quote in an attempt to support their erroneous satanic claims:

Deuteronomy 6:4 (KJV) Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

Deuteronomy 6:4 (MCV) Hear, O Israel: The Yahavah our Yah is one Yahavah:

Please note, as I dissect this verse it will be, in part, a repeat of what I have said above.

Hear, O Israel” – or better translated “Hear you Israel” or “Listen up you Israelites”, for I, your Yahavah, have something important to tell you:

The Lord our Yah – properly translated from the Hebrew; The Yahavah (The Lord) = The Eternal or The Self-Existing. Our Yah = Our God – Our ‘Elohim’ (plural); the Yahhead that has always self-existed before time began and was/is always a plural Duality Yahhead.

Straight away in this short phrase of Set Apart (Holy) Scripture we are told by the use of this word ‘Elohim’ (the plural of ‘Eloah’) that we are dealing with more than one Yah. Look folks, there is no getting away from this Truth, and we need to get it through our heads that the Hebrew word ‘Eloah’ (singular) would have been in use here, not ‘Elohim’, IF Yah was one. OK, so we have now ascertained that The Yahhead is more than one, and yet it says:

Is One Yahavah (Lord) – so what’s going on here and what does this mean? The Hebrew word here for ‘one’ is ‘Echad’ which means ‘united’ or ‘in unity’ in one sense, and ‘number one’ the prime number in the other sense, that is, no one higher or no one above – The Most High as written elsewhere in the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures.

One – H259 – אחד – ‘echâd ekh-awd’ – A numeral from H258; properly united, that is, (as) one; or (as an ordinal) first:a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any (-thing), apiece, a certain [dai-] ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.

OK, as we can see the word ONE does not mean solitary or one yah or a mono-yah, for it means UNITED AS ONE, that is, in agreement in thought, word and deed, yet still distinct and separate as Two Spiritual Beings.

A Numeral – H258 אחד – ‘âchad aw-khad’ Perhaps a primitive root; to unify, that is, (figuratively) collect (one’s thoughts): – go one way or other.

The primitive root word then confirms this for us – TO UNIFY!! And again this, in turn, means They are not one being, for being united or unified is always an arrangement whereby a number of beings are at one with each other or unanimous in their thoughts, aims and ideals, as in a football team. Newcastle United is a team of individuals united in one aim – to win, but they are not one being, they are eleven distinct beings. This is how it is with the Godhead; they are Two Spiritual Beings, united as one in thought, mind and deed – totally likeminded – united!

This, too, is why The Yahavah, through Paul, exhorts the Congregations of Yah to be like the Yahhead in their relationships one with another:

Romans 15:5-6 (MCV) Now the Yah of Patience and Comforting grant you to be likeminded and/or of a mutually agreeable mindset, one toward another according to Messiah Yashua: 6 That ye may be united with one mind and one mouth Glorify Yah, even The Father of our Yahavah Yashua Messiah.

Take note, the Congregations of Yah were not ONE BEING, but they were exhorted by Paul to be of ONE MIND just like The Father and The Son and like the Yahhead of Yah with Yah in the beginning who said: “Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness:”

 

If we now move on to the New Testament we have a new word for the Yahhead and that word is the Greek word Theos’ instead of the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’. However we need to be clear that just because a Greek word is now used, instead of a Hebrew word, doesn’t mean that the nature, character and make-up of the Duality Yahhead has changed. In fact the Greek word ‘theos’ is very useful for this topic for, generally, it means a DEITY and in the Greek sense that automatically means gods plural, for the Greeks were polytheists – they, like the ancient Egyptians, had many gods. As far as I know they did not have a word in their language to describe a monotheistic god. It was only the Canaanite Serpent Seed Jews that worshipped such a deity and they worshipped that deity in error, and in ignorance, when they knew very well that Yah ‘Elohim’ was a plural Yahhead.

Yah (God) – G2316 – θεός theos theh’-os – Of uncertain affinity; a (polytheistic) deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding, God, god [-ly, ward].

So there we have it: ‘Theos’ = a polytheistic deity and in Ancient Greece that would mean more than one god, not a mono-god. Not only that, but because ‘Theos’ is such a general all encompassing word in terms of objects of worship, it means it can be interpreted any way you like, if you have a monotheistic or triune agenda to fulfil. Moreover, notice, that within this very definition we can see Strong doing just that with all his figurative nonsense regarding ‘magistrates’. With regard to ‘magistrates’ I will leave a link below for additional reading regarding this satanic subject.

Here is some interesting backup information from this web page: https://goedbericht.nl/english/god-placer/

Based on the previous blog, I received a question, How do you come to the definition of the Greek word “theos” (God) as PLACER? The well-known Lexicon to the New Testament of Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, says the following:

The most probable derivation is from the verb theo, to place (see tithemi, Str. 5087). The heathen thought the gods were disposers (theteres, placers) and formers of all things.

The Keyword Concordance of the Concordant Literal New Testament presents the same origin of theos. The verb appoint or place we also recognize in our word thesis, which is a proposition (anti-thesis = contrast, synthesis = composition). Below are some passages where the word theos is remarkable combined with tithemi, from which it was derived.

Romans 4:17 … A father of many nations have I appointed you – facing which, he believes it of the GOD … 1 Corinthians 12:18 Yet now GOD placed the members, each one of them, in the body according as He wills. 1 Corinthians 12:2…whom also GOD, indeed, placed in the ecclesia, first, apostl… 1Thessalonians 5:9 for GOD did not appoint us to indignation…”

The Greek word theos is much more concrete than our word Yah (God). Theos refers to One Who appoints everything and gives it a place. Nothing takes place without Him giving it a place.”

Furthermore, because we know that The Yahhead does not cause confusion re their identity we can definitely know for sure that plural ‘Theos’ in the NT means exactly the same as plural ‘Elohim’ in the OT – The Duality Yahhead with The Set Apart Exclusive Spirit as their LIVING POWER.

One last Scripture:

Galatians 3:20 (MCV) Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but Yah is one.

Now does this verse make any sense? First of all, who is The Mediator that this verse is referring to? Answer: Yashua Messiah. And was Yashua Messiah Yah come in the flesh? Answer: Yes, hence it states quite plainly that a mediator is not of one, so there has to be more than one in order for one to mediate to the other and yet it then says: “Yah is one!” So what’s going on here?

Easy, Yah = ‘Theos’ = ‘Elohim’ = more than one, for the Yahhead does not change:

Malachi 3:6 (MCV) For I am The YAHAVAH, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Here below we have Yashua Messiah speaking on behalf of the Yahhead for He tells no one has ever seen or heard The Father:

John 1:18 (MCV) No man hath seen Yah (The Father) at any time; The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of The Father, He hath declared Him.

John 5:37 (MCV) And The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. YE HAVE NEITHER HEARD HIS VOICE AT ANY TIME, NOR SEEN HIS SHAPE.

So there it is folks, NO ONE has ever seen or heard The Father at any time, so that must mean that Yashua Messiah was The Yah of the Old Testament who spoke on behalf of Himself and/or The Father – The Duality Yahhead. (See link Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 below).

In Yashua Messiah’s name,

Messenger Charles

1. Exposing the Trinity Lie!:  https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/exposing-the-trinity-lie-part-1/

2. Are Trinity Worshippers Anti-Christs?: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/are-trinity-worshippers-anti-christs/

3. Can Christians Grieve The Holy Spirit?: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/can-christians-grieve-the-holy-spirit/

4. Can Christians Lie to The Holy Spirit?: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/2016/04/28/ananias-and-sapphira-how-we-can-know-this-is-a-false-or-a-fake-story/

5. Matthew 28:19 Is a Spurious Verse and Baptism is Not Into The Trinity: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/should-christians-be-baptised-into-yashua-messiahs-the-lord-jesus-christs-name-alone-part-1/

6. The Satanic Curse of Monotheism – Is God ONE? – Part 1:

7. Was and Is Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) God?: