Issued: 02/05/22  Revised: 2/3/24

PLEASE NOTE:  Because Bible versions sometimes differ from each other in crucial ways, the version quoted here will be the one that best clarifies the point being made.  For a quick comparison between versions, please go to: http://www.biblehub.com.

   All bracketed material may be authorial comments, attempts at proper syntax, or minimal rewordings of Scripture for the sake of clarity and continuity.  These emendations will not be italicized.

   The “/” will be used to signify “and/or.”  The symbol “↔” is used to connect verses corroborating each other and so establishing doctrinal truths (Matthew 18:16↔2Corinthians 13:1).

   In differentiating between Yahweh Son [Jesus] and Yahweh Father [the Most High God], lower case letters have been used when discussing the former; upper case letters are reserved for the Only and Most High God.  Since Jesus was at pains to differentiate himself from Father, we have followed his lead here.

   The term neo-Christians will be used to differentiate between false Christians and Jesus’ true followers.

The Causes of Human Suffering

“The foolishness of man undermines whatever he undertakes; then his heart is resentful and blames Yahweh instead of himself”

Proverbs 19:3

   The meaning of human suffering has preoccupied philosophers for ages.  On a human level, some reasons are quite simple.  Those who have lots of material wealth do not share it equally/equitably with others.  Those living in luxury are not overly concerned with those living in squalor; and to paraphrase a savvy American politician, if not sitting at the table of the powers that be, collateral damage from every walk of life will be on their menus.  People lavish billions of dollars on their pets for justified and banal reasons:  If those expenses were diverted to animals worldwide vital to human subsistence and empowerment, less suffering would exist.  If rather than buying our children the latest electronic gadgetry and Pokemon ‘opiates’ those monies went to feed, clothe, and educate third-world children, less crushing poverty would lead to more hope, less violence, and greater social welfare and worldwide stability.  Nothing new here, folks:  “As long as people live, their minds are full of evil and madness” (Ecclesiastes 9:3); and because of this, from Genesis to Revelation, men have enabled, abetted, and been complicit in perpetuating world misery (Genesis 6:5; 2Timothy 3:1-5; James 2:15-17; 1John 3:17; Revelation 9:20-21).

   Simply put, human suffering is a consequence of human evil, be it greed, ambition, lust for power, lack of fraternal love, godlessness, and every form of behavior where empathy and sympathy for others are irrelevant or downright non-existent.  Some natural catastrophes are beyond human intervention; but if the world is awash in sorrow—and paraphrasing Jesus’ analogy in Matthew 13:38, it is became men till it and sow it with men’s inhumanities to men.  As long as our priorities are taken care of in terms of family values or national priorities, the rest be damned—figuratively and literally.  Like Pontius Pilate, we absolve ourselves of guilt by passing the buck to others (Matthew 27:24).

 On a spiritual level, the Bible answers the question of human suffering in terms of good versus evil, Father versus Satan.  This entails belief in two beings who are on the main not thought to exist—at least to ‘enlightened’ minds.  Attempting a scientific explanation, [which according to Paul is never a good idea↔1Timothy 6:20-21], it would be like trying to understand diseases without linking them to causative pathogens.  Whereas the Bible tells us that dis-eases have spiritual—albeit Satanic—origins (Job 2:7; Luke 13:16), science looks down a microscope and identifies pathogenic culprits.  As always the choice between opposing gospels:  That of Jesus pooh-poohing evidence unessential for conviction (John 20:29; Hebrews 11:1), and that of Satan showing proof indispensable for conviction.

   As signposts on the journey to salvation, the Bible relies on certain devices.  One is the corroboration by two or three witnesses repeating Scriptural teachings (Matthew 18:16; 2Corinthians 13:1); whose main corollary is Isaiah 8:20 enhanced by Deuteronomy 29:29, Mark 4:11-12, 1Corinthians 2:10-14, and 2Corinthians 4:3-4.  Perhaps the most important one is the most counterintuitive:   We walk by faith and not by sight (2Corinthians 5:7), where faith comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17)—not as preached by men but as written down in Scripture.

   Only in and through Scripture, can the harsh realities of human existence discussed below be understood.

God’s Role in Human Suffering

   The Bible singles out Father and Satan as causative factors for human suffering.  In Father’s case, since by His own admission nothing happens without His intervention (Isaiah 45:7; Daniel 4:35), He allows Satan to act, as were the cases with Job (1:2, 2:6), Jesus himself (Isaiah 53:6,10; John 18:11, 19:11), and all the Judeo-Christian faithful since Abel (Jeremiah 25:29; Ezekiel 9:6; Hebrews 12:5-10; 1Peter 4:17,5:6).  Now if Father is love (1John 4:8); if He allowed Jesus’ crucifixion for love of mankind (John 3:16); and if good and bad cannot flow from the same source (James 3:11-12), why does Father permit human suffering?

  Easy, simplistic rather:  Because His love is predicated on obedience to His covenant (John 14:21,23).  Contrary to popular belief and evangelical platitudes, Father is a Deity to be feared, respected, and submitted to, unlike Aladdin’s genie catering to subjective expectations irrespective of moral and spiritual integrity.  In our myopic vision of His nature, if Father loves us, then He ought prioritize our and our families’ needs like we do; when they are not, we badmouth Him.  This is the gist of Proverbs 19:3.

   But this misconception brings us to another human foible:  Failing to recognize that a God Who shows favoritism towards no one, even His own Son, will not prioritize anybody’s needs over anyone else’s.  He struck a deal on the way to Canaan with the proviso that if people did what He commanded [not only those in attendance but with generations yet unborn↔Deuteronomy 29:14-15], He would take care of their needs; do what they pleased contrary to His laws and He would cut them off.  And He sealed the deal with a non-negotiable warning:  “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse: therefore choose life, that you may live, you and your seed” (Deuteronomy 28, 30:19).  It boils down to a case of obey or else.

   Sounds rankling, does it not, being told how to behave?  Not really:  It is the standard human reaction to resenting the inability of having one’s cake and eat it too.  An owner is within his right to demand and expect behaviors he prefers in exchange for sundry benefits extended to tenants.  Father is the owner of a creation (Psalms 24:1) where human beings are homesteaders—more precisely, pilgrims in danger of eviction if defaulting on His contract (Leviticus 18:26-30, 25:23).  As He made clear in Job 41:11, He owes mankind nothing.  We are tenants on a trial basis asked to follow the landlord’s rules, standard practice in tenancy.  Surely, it would be hypocritical to fault Father for following men’s own rules—which He has done for the purpose stated in 1Corinthians 1:27-29.

   Now comes another unwelcomed reality:  The value of suffering in fostering reconciliation with Him.  What does Jesus’ response in John 9:2-3 tell us?  The man’s blindness was not comeuppance for parental sinfulness, nor ordained by Father; but since it provided the opportunity for a miraculous cure, it furthered Father‘s agenda.  So did demonic possessions or leprosy:  Because Jesus was able to undo them, people were willing to believe Father’s word (John 4:48).  Faith comes easier for some than others, which is why the former are exalted vis-à-vis the latter (John 20:29).  Nevertheless it is personal suffering which “purifies” souls (Psalms 39:11; Proverbs 20:30) and “refines” faith (Isaiah 48:10; Zechariah 13:9; 1Peter 1:6-7).  In this sense Satan’s every aggression against mankind has been anticipated and incorporated into Father’s plan of redemption, so that literally out of evil, good may come.

   This is also why affliction is Father’s ‘clincher’:  “In their affliction they will seek Me earnestly… and find Me when [searching] for Me with all your heart” (Hosea 5:15; Jeremiah 29:13).  Which tells us what?  That to this day, no matter what we may believe, Father has not been sought wholeheartedly, but only to the extent of pipe-dreaming that we are honky-dory with Him.  Hence the recriminations in Isaiah 1:13-20, 29:13, 30:10; Jeremiah 4:22, 5:31, 6:13-14, and so many others calling the bluff to our self-serving expectations.  Ezra’s (9:1-15) and Daniel’s (9:1-19) confessions highlight men’s recalcitrance to obey Father’s will­­—though this mindset had been foreseen even before the Israelites had set foot in Canaan (Deuteronomy 31:16-21,29).

   No matter how many times warnings are repeated (Jeremiah 29:19), men will neither listen nor deviate from their evil ways until the proverbial hellfire is breathing down their necks­­—but not always, as Revelation 9:20-21 show. Father, though anguished by it (Isaiah 63:9), will be constrained to allow Satan to have his field day.

Satan’s Role in Human Suffering

 Still, having posited that a God of love cannot mete out un-love (James 3:11-12), we need review two things.  First there is Father, the Most High God, and there is His appointed proxy God Son, the Son/Prince/King over earthly kings/High Priest (Isaiah 9:6-7; Hebrews 7:1-3,20-28; Revelation 19:13,16↔John 1:1). In the Old Testament they are respectively identified as Yahweh King of Israel and His Redeemer, Yahweh of hosts (Isaiah 44:6).  And though most people speak of them as one person, they are not in terms of substance, but only in terms of being of one mind so that only Father’s will gets implemented (John 7:16): He calls the shots that His Redeemer Son will enforce until this arrangement expires (1Corinthians 15:24-28).  We have detailed these things at length in the series On the Divinity of Jesus; suffice it to restate here that erroneously worshipping Jesus as the True and Only God deprives the Father of His rightful worship (Hosea 7:13, 11:7).

   No one in his right mind could conceive of a Deity’s hands-on involvement in running His own house, any more than kings/queens are expected to perform household chores at their palaces.  Royalty has stewards and staff taking care of daily business, and Father is no different.  Jesus is the plenipotentiary, appointed steward over creation and Father’s House, the human-bricked Church (Matthew 28:18; Romans 9:5; Colossians 1:16-19; Hebrews 3:6; 1Peter 2:5; Revelation 1:18); whereas Satan has been given limited stewardship over men’s kingdoms (Luke 4:6). —which in turn suggests, as is the case, that none is likely to behave ‘Christian-like.’  Because the world is divided into warring factions of good and evil, the faithful led by Jesus and the children of disobedience led by Satan (Ephesians 2:2) are engaged in spiritual battle throughout nations worldwide (Ephesians 6:12).  This division of labor is the gist of Isaiah 22:15-25. Because the world is divided into warring factions of good and evil, the faithful led by Jesus and the children of disobedience led by Satan (Ephesians 2:2) are engaged in spiritual battle throughout nations worldwide (Ephesians 6:12)—which in turn suggests, as we can see from daily newscasts, that none is likely to behave ‘Christian-like.’

 As can be surmised, no understanding of human suffering is possible if excluding Satan from the discussion, for even he plays a vital role in Father’s redemptive plan.  Were it not for Satan, no heavenly being would be capable of inflicting human harm:  It is not in their natures to do so.  Satan, who was created perfect, by choice and unilaterally devolved himself into an evildoer (Ezekiel 28:12,15).  Over time he seduced other angels to follow him in trying to usurp divine sovereignty (Job 4:18; Isaiah 14:13-14; Jude 1:6)—naturally with him as head honcho, standard procedure amongst his human cronies.

   Speaking for Father, Yahweh Son—the Logos, Verb, Word, for the Most High has never spoken to men (John 1:1, 5:37)—declared that Father has withheld His anger throughout human history (Isaiah 42:14; Jeremiah 6:11), from pre-Jesus “times of ignorance” to post-Jesus end-times (Isaiah 49:8; Zephaniah 2:2; Acts 1:7, 17:30; 2Corinthians 6:2; Revelation 17:17).  None of the so-called ‘acts of God’ men are fond of blaming Father for have been initiated and executed by Him:  As Job 1:12-19 shows, human catastrophes are the work of Satan.  Remember the warning in Deuteronomy 28:45?  Having forewarned, will Father not remain true to His word [↔Numbers 23:19]?

   We are not here as apologetics for Father:  It is the way contractual agreements are carried out, wherein defaults lead to penalties—in men’s case, remanded to Satan’s custody.  In Ezekiel 21:14 Satan is identified as the “slaughtering sword,” an epithet both figurative and literal; for as Exodus 12:23, 2Samuel 24:16, 1Chronicles 21:16 and Revelation 6:8 show, Satan wields a sword wreaking destruction under divine control.  He cannot do as he pleases, nor is he as powerful as human propaganda would have us believe; for if Father gave him carte blanche against humanity, no one would stand a chance.

Men’s and Women’s Role in Human Suffering

   Thus human beings empower Satan to put them through the wringer—which is why the everlasting covenant was struck with them and not with Satan.  Were they to uphold Father’s laws, they could hold Satan at bay, or send him packing were they to resist his wiles (James 4:7).  The fact that there is suffering in the world is because evildoing is second nature to men (Ecclesiastes 8:11, 9:3).¹  And guess what?  Hearts are Petri dishes for the unholy admixture of human and Satanic ingredients, the agar nurturing the evil that festers, multiplies and exterminates (Matthew 12:43-45; Luke 6:45, 11:34; John 8:44).

   And by human we mean male and female people.  That Scripture speaks of the hearts of men as incubators for evil (Genesis 8:21; Ecclesiastes 7:29, 8:11, 9:3) does not exonerate women, whose gender, if not their kind, is Satan’s counter-symbol for everything that undermines Jesus, be it ‘Mary’ as go-between usurping Jesus’ exclusive role as sole mediator between Father and men (1Timothy 2:5), or a harlot mother-church mother ‘birthing’ harlot denominations (Revelation 17:5).

   In point of fact, this harlotry is Scripturese for adultery with false gods, not a reference to human prostitution; for the latter cannot accomplish what adulterous synagogues/churches are so efficient at:  Reducing men to morsels swallowed in the hunt for human souls (Proverbs 6:26).  It is these symbolic women, not their mortal counterparts, who are embodied in the adulteress of Proverbs 7:1-27 [note verse 19 suggesting Jesus] and Ecclesiastes 7:26; through whom Satan seeks to devour unwary souls (1Peter 5:8).  Which is also the reason why her virtuous counterpart, the faithful wife/church is both laudable and rare (Proverbs 31:10-31; Ecclesiastes 7:28).

   Early on Satan seized upon men’s Achilles’ heel:  An almost instinctive need to defer to women/female symbols.  At the mortal level, Satan did not tempt Adam:  He worked through Eve knowing that Adam would defer to her (Genesis 3:6).  Eve could have eaten the forbidden fruit and let the chips fall where they might; Adam could have refused her; but Satan knew that one bad actor loves to involve others, especially where sex rules the way.  Was not Samson betrayed by women unworthy of his trust (Judges 14:15-17, 16:17)?  What set David on the path to complicit manslaughter?  His lust for Bathsheba (2Samuel 11:2-4,15).  Was not Solomon despite all his wisdom led astray by concubines (1Kings 11:3)?  And amongst the problems Paul saw in marriage, did he not say that “he who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife” (1Corinthians 7:33)?

   Though Satan has cleverly spun these teachings into evidence of Biblical male chauvinism [courtesy of scholars and detractors↔Jeremiah 8:8], the issue here is not hatred of women but a flare warning that in order to misdirect men’s souls, Satan will rely on female entities, be them goddesses of antiquity [Judges 2:13↔Astoreth as Satan’s/Baal’s co-regent];  queens of heaven foreshadowing today’s Marian cult [Jeremiah 46:17-27, emphasis on verse 19]; adulterous “sisters” like Israel and Judah (Jeremiah 3:6-10); whorish cities like Jerusalem and Babylon (Isaiah 1:21, Ezekiel 23; Isaiah 47); or desecrated places of worship like churches and synagogues (Jeremiah 5:7; Ezekiel 8:14-17; Revelation 17:5, 18:3-10).

The Synergy between the Divine and the Profane

   How does it all work in Biblical practice?  For one, as discussed in Isaiah 22:15-25, Father has defined spheres of influence where good and evil do battle.  Neither Jesus nor Satan can unilaterally push or shove men around:  What allows their intervention in human affairs is human beings’ predisposition to good or evil.

Exhibit I

   Let us begin with Exodus 5.  Moses went to Pharaoh and in name of Yahweh asked for the release of the Israelites. Confident of his own God-given status, Pharaoh rejected Yahweh’s sovereignty; since Israel’s bondage was good for the Egyptian economy, he refused to free them; and to quell what amounted to pro-union demands, he told his underlings to make life even more hellish for the Israelites.  In summary:  1) Pharaoh rejected Father, consolidating Satan’s hold over him; and 2) the enforced brutality he advocated spoke volumes of his instinctive inhumanity to men.  Bottom line:  A black heart matching Satan’s; like father, like son (John 8:44); Satan and Pharaoh were of one mind to do evil, just as Father and Jesus are of one mind to do good (John 10:30).

   Enter Exodus 7:3:  “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.”  Firstly, Yahweh Son Angel proxy God was interacting with Moses (Exodus 3:2-6), not Yahweh Father who has never spoken to men (John 5:37)—the arrangement replicated at the human level in Exodus 7:1↔Genesis 41:40; John 14:28; 1Timothy 2:5↔Deuteronomy 18:15.  Secondly, Yahweh Son could not personally be “hardening” Pharaoh’s heart if he was giving Pharaoh the option to comply and be spared the consequences for refusing. Who could straighten what Father had made crooked (Ecclesiastes 7:13)?  Thirdly, “heart hardening” is an act not undertaken at the divine level but delegated to someone else as a form of sentence for evildoing (Lamentations 3:64-66); so that fourthly, by making human hearts fully impervious to good, Satan makes human beings enforcers of his will.

  Thus the human Pharaoh’s response to Moses, shaped by his moral shortcomings, was supplemented by Satan’s unyielding inhumanity, so that Satan’s will ultimately prevailed (Romans 6:16).  In their respective roles, Moses and Pharaoh were channeling a discourse between Jesus and Satan, a view supported by Ezekiel 29:3, wherein Pharaoh king of Egypt is a symbol for Satan↔Revelation 20:2.²  And Exodus 7:22,-23, 8:15, and 9:34 leave no room for doubt that both Pharaohs—human and spiritual—embraced “hardening” irrespective of their minions’ suffering during and after troubles were over.  It was only when the human Pharaoh’s own son perished that he relented (Exodus 12:23). Satan lost nothing.

    Were the Egyptian plagues necessary?  Yes:  Failing the liberation of Father’s people by diplomatic means, catastrophes became de rigueur in order for men to see who was Boss. Still, no one plague was chosen by Father but foreseen when left to Satan’s devices.  Concessions were made so that the Egyptians would be spared further suffering; but once things looked up, pledges were not honored (Exodus 8:28-32).  One could almost argue that Pharaoh’s loss of his son was inevitable given Father’s understanding of Satan’s twisted view of human nature (Job 2:5).  Men will not deviate from their goals unless overwhelmed by consequences of their evil deeds, which is the reason why suffering permitted by Father but inflicted by Satan become necessities rather than choices.  Father disciplines people as a result of their iniquities (Psalm 39:11); though being love (1John 4:7), the punishments are never wished for, yet allowed as measures of last resort to save souls (2Samuel 14:14; Lamentations 3:32-33; Ezekiel 33:11; Joel 2:13).

   In this narrative, there is no question that good came out of evil.  The Israelites had been harshly enslaved for 430 years (Exodus 12:40), during which time three things had transpired:  1) The Egyptians had forgotten Joseph’s contributions to their nation (Exodus 1:8-9); 2) Israelites had flourished and become too numerous vis-à-vis the native population, for which reason they had to be dispossessed and suppressed [the sad reality of Jewish life across the centuries↔Exodus 1:9-14]; and 3) to their detriment, they had assimilated Egyptian customs inimical to Yahweh’s laws.

   The plagues, which could have been avoided had Pharaoh consented to release the Israelites, forced Pharaoh’s hand to do so; but out of sight did not lead to out of mind:  His intrinsic ill-will demanded score-settling; thus Yahweh once again allowed Satan to “harden” Pharaoh’s heart (Exodus 14:4-7); and Satan happily obliged out of his own malevolence. Pharaoh aimed to slaughter the Israelites as they crossed the Red Sea, whereupon his obedient henchmen lost their lives (Exodus 14:27-28). Gains for Satan: The souls of all dead.  Gains for Father: Setting His people free and en route to Canaan—the promised land foreshadowing the real McCoy at the end of time.

Exhibit II

   Let us examine one example stretching over the centuries.  Upon razing Jericho to the ground, Joshua pronounced a curse upon anyone rebuilding it (Joshua 6:26).  It is no coincidence that Joshua, by birth called Hoshea (Numbers 13:16), was renamed Joshua:  As one of Jesus’ human symbols, only under a name matching Jesus’ [Heb., Yeshua] woud Joshua wage battles against pagan nations in order to lead Father’s people into the promised land.  And like Moses, he received his instructions directly from Yahweh Son Angel proxy God, whom he worshipped exactly as Moses did (Exodus 3:5; Joshua 5:13-15).  The sword that this “Commander of Yahweh’s army” was wielding was that of the Holy Spirit, Father’s word (Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17↔Matthew 10:24; Revelation 1:16).

   Joshua’s curse had the divine endorsement associated with prophet-warriors like Elijah (1Kings 17:1, 18:36-38, 41-45; 2Kings 1:10-12).  These were those “times of ignorance” when fear of Father had to be sledge-hammered into unbelieving hearts; later rescinded when soldiering for Jesus (Zechariah 4:6; Matthew 26:52; Ephesians 6:12-17; James 5:6).  Also Joshua’s and Elijah’s pronouncements were Father’s bond:  Whatever they said and transpired corroborated their legitimacy as Father’s spokesmen (Deuteronomy 19:21-22).  Still their ‘victims’ were not arbitrarily chosen:  They were worshippers of Baal/Satan; thus in default of Father’s covenant of obedience.

   When Ahab rebuilt Jericho, he paid the price stipulated by Joshua (1Kings 16:34).  After all Ahab was a die-hard recidivist³ when it came to alienating Father:  He followed his wife Jezebel’s evil lead (1Kings 21:25); worshipped idols of female goddesses; built shrines to worship Satan under the guise of Baal (1Kings 16:29-33); so that he could obtain Naboth’s vineyard, Jezebel resorted to the false-witness ploy later used against Jesus (1Kings 21:8-12↔Mark 14:56-59).  In similar fashion, just as Yahweh faulted Adam and not Eve for her transgression (Genesis 3:11-12,17), Yahweh faulted Ahab, not Jezebel, for following her dictates (1Kings 21:19).

   Ahab went into repentance mode and the fate that would have befallen him was reserved for Jezebel (1Kings 21:23, 27-29).  Ever the confident seductress, Jezebel resorted to a cosmetic overhaul in order to dazzle Jehu, who was on a mission to exterminate anyone connected with Ahab (2Kings 9 and 10).  Jezebel’s was unceremoniously thrown out a window and her blood spattered on walls and horses’ hooves.  As a dinner afterthought, Jehu instructed that she be buried as was customary for her rank; but the dogs of Jezreel had beaten him to the punch, already having dined on her flesh as Elijah had prophesied (1Kings 21:23; 2Kings 9:30-36).  They must have been ravenous for they left very little of her (2Kings 9:35).

Exhibit III

   The Salome story, who first of all, is unnamed in Scripture (Matthew 14:6).  The name appears in the writings of 1^st Century Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus.

  Secondly, the name Herod refers to different rulers in the Gospels.  Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC—assuming Jesus was born that year—was the ruler quizzing the Magi about the location of Jesus’ birth, though not, as he claimed, in order to worship him.⁴  He was more interested in safeguarding his position; thus having been fooled by the Magi, who in turn had been warned by heaven about his ulterior motives, Herod, like all savvy politicians, went into damage control mode:  He ordered the slaughter of all newborns up to two years of age (Matthew 2:7-16) in order to eliminate political contenders.

 Note the parallels between this narrative and the Egyptian plague decimating first-borns.  Two rulers whose main consideration was crushing challenges to their authority irrespective of consequences to their subjects: “Hardened” hearts consumed by Satan’s lust for absolute power (Isaiah 14:13-14); thus chips of the old Moloch (John 8:44) and will-less vectors venting Satan’s homicidal instincts (John 8:44; Ephesians 2:2).  Since offspring are men’s symbolic claim to eternity, what better proof of Satan’s contempt for and hatred of men but by killing their children?⁵  If he cannot have eternal life, neither will anyone he can bring down with him.

   The Herod who interacted with John the Baptist and Jesus was the son of Herod the Great, Herod Antipas.  He was exiled to Spain [Hispania] by the Emperor Caligula in 39 AD, where he died date unknown.  The Herod who abruptly expired and was eaten by worms in Acts 12:20-23 was Herod Agrippa, Antipas’ successor.  All of them were Edomites [Idumeans], descendants of Esau (Genesis 36:1); which is to say accursed of God (Ezekiel 25:12-14; Joel 3:19; Amos 1:12); and like Ishmael/Esau driven to beset Isaac’s/Israel’s progeny (Genesis 32:28, 35:10↔Galatians 4:28-29).

   Herod Antipas is the person of interest here.  In violation of Leviticus 18:16, 20:21, he had bedded Herodias, his half-brother’s wife.  There is a lot of scholarly controversy about when or if ever an actual marriage took place; but Leviticus’ beef is against sexual congress, not the ceremonial rite.

   Since John the Baptist kept harping on Herod’s transgression, Herodias, who despised the Baptist for broadcasting her sinfulness [↔John 3:20], turned to the winning strategy of using a woman, her daughter but not Herod’s, to ensnare the latter.  Herodias asked Salome to dance for Herod at his birthday party, the presumption being, as insinuated in some works of art, that Herod had the hots for his stepdaughter.  Be that as it may, Salome’s musical number hit a home-run; and probably plied with too much booze and recklessly happy, Herod offered to give Salome whatever she wished—barring half his reign, just in case.  Herodias told Salome to ask for the head of John the Baptist on a silver platter.  Herod was horrified, but as he had to save face amidst attending VIPs, he gave the order to decapitate the Baptist (Mark 6:17-28).

  Though Herodias, like Eve, is the baddie in this narrative, let us not forget that Herod, like Adam and Ahab, gave in to women’s demands though they knew better.  Adam knew the Tree of Knowledge was off limits; Herod knew that the Baptist, though breaking social protocol, was a righteous and holy man whose teachings intrigued him (Mark 6:20).  Yet to please Eve, Adam ate the forbidden fruit (Genesis 3:6); and to please Herodias, Herod had the Baptist put in jail in order to silence him (Luke 3:19-20)—which made Herodias’ vendetta that much easier.

   The point here is not to downplay men’s guilt but to equalize the role women play in enabling and abetting human evil.  Herodias was to John the Baptist what Jezebel was to Elijah (1Kings 19:1-2):  Score settlers needing to conscript men to carry out their respective agendas.  Also we must not overlook an indirect link that Scripture makes between both women:  Elijah and John the Baptist dressed similarly (2Kings 1:8; Matthew 3:4); and in prophecy, Elijah is a symbol for the Baptist (Malachi 4:5; Matthew 11:14, 17:12).  As were their victims, Jezebel and Herodias were cut from the same mold.

   It is no coincidence that the church in Revelation 2:20-23 is chastised  for tolerating “that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and who teaches and leads my servants to practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.”  The Old Testament Jezebel was a devotee of Baal, which is to say Satan; and the specific denomination Jesus is finger-pointing apparently imitates her unholy behaviors. However, all seven Revelation churches are enclaves of either Satan or his minions (Revelation 2:2,6,9,13-15, 3:1-2,9,15-17): The whole of Christendom is compromised.

   We will continue our discourse on Satan in our next chapter.

¹ This Scripture makes an oblique reference to Genesis 6:1-5.  By no stretch of the imagination can we believe that evil is a question of gender and that the hearts of women are not as evil as men’s.  Because Woman was taken from Man, she is not considered a distinct entity from him, anymore than the Church, Jesus’ body, exists independent of him (Ephesians 5:22-32).

   In Genesis 6:1 sons of God, who are erroneously thought to be angels [all of whom according to Jesus are sexless↔Mark 12:25], are called thus because they were directly created by Yahweh Son proxy Creator wielding Father‘s power in their shared images (Genesis 1:26; John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2-3; James 3:9).  Since Woman was taken out of Man, women are called “daughters of men.”

   Even more germane to our discussion, men’s unbridled lust for females is particularly damning in Father’s eyes, for Whom fidelity to one sexual partner is paramount (Malachi 2:14-16).

² Which in turn exemplifies another Biblical device, Isaiah 28:13, Father’s MO across the ages as the Bible was being written—a work, reputedly, authored by the Holy Spirit using men as His amanuenses (2Peter 1:20-21).

³ Violator of Commandments 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10.

⁴ Herod the Great, a man drenched in blood, renovated and expanded the Second Temple rebuilt by such faith stalwarts as Ezra, Nehemiah, Zerubabbel et al.  It is a sign of the spiritual corruption of Jewish priests in Jesus’ time that they believed their God would inhabit such a place.  Having shed so much blood, David could not build Father’s house; thus Solomon, “a man of peace and rest,” was tasked with building the First Temple (1Chronicles 22:7-10).  Naturally all of this prefigures Jesus and his building of Father’s everlasting Temple, the human-bricked Church of which Jesus is chief cornerstone (Psalms 118:22; Isaiah 28:16-17; Acts 4:11; Ephesians 2:19-22; Hebrews 3:6; 1Peter 2:5).

   When Solomon finished his work, “the glory of Yahweh” entered the Holy of Holies (1Kings 8:11), an expression to this day misunderstood:  It does not refer to Father‘s presence but to His signal creation, Light/Yahweh Son (Genesis 1:3; Colossians 1:15; Revelation 3:14), which prefigured that of Light/Jesus (Luke 1:35; John 1:9, 8:12). Father has never inhabited man-made temples (Acts 7:48); and Solomon understood quite well that a proxy God was indwelling the First Temple.  He very stated that while pleas would be made in the Holy of Holies on earth to Yahweh Son proxy God, Yahweh Father would hear them in Heaven (1Kings 8:27-53).

 After Herod the Great renovated the Second Temple, no divine presence would have inhabited the Holy of Holies:  Herod, for all his political PR ploy to please pious Jews, had effectively desecrated the Temple; which is the reason why Jesus, the incarnated Yahweh Son, ministered outside the Temple and pointed to his body as the Father’s new abode (Luke 21:5-6; John 2:19-22↔2Corinthians 6:16; Colossians 2:9; Ephesians 4:6, 5:23).  Hence the later arrangement of Jesus’ flesh doubling as the veil separating mankind from the Divinity in the heavenly Holy of Holies where Father could be accessed (Hebrews 8:5, 10:19-22). Note the relationship between aromatic incense in cultic worship and the prayers of the righteous (Leviticus 24:7↔Revelation 5:8); salt in terms of ‘flavoring’ the Covenant of Faith (Matthew 5:13↔Leviticus 2:13); and the blood of sacrificial animals sanctifying the people vis-a-vis Jesus’ blood (Exodus 24:8↔Hebrews 9:7-8,12-14, 12:24).

⁵ Heaven’s objective is the opposite (Deuteronomy 25:6); though in the spiritual sense, the “dead brother” in question is Jesus, his Church the wife with whom he consorts to raise him spiritual progeny.  Paul understood this dynamic quite well (Galatians 4:19; Philemon 1:10).