Ken Ammi’s True Free Thinker:
BooksYouTube or OdyseeTwitterFacebookSearch

Gary Wayne on the Serpent Seed Theory—and Seraphim Angels

In his video, Gary Wayne on The Serpent Seed | Part 1: Gen. 4 | The Christian Contrarian Ep. 33, Wayne note upfront:

I’m somewhat agnostic as to whether or not Cain is the offspring of Adam and Eve or, as many assert, the offspring…of Satan and Eve.

But I lean heavily to the literal application as the offspring of Adam and Eve and I leave a small door open, it’s not really a big deal to me which way it actually is because I think things kind of work out.

But I actually think that the serpent seed is probably fulfilled—that’s in Genesis 3:15, by the way—with the giants and the Seraphim Angels, who are the Watchers, who produce the serpent offspring that look just like the Seraphim fiery serpent Angels.

That fulfill, that fits better, for me, in terms of my approach to the Bible.

There’s a lot to unpack already.

I’m unsure how someone could only be “somewhat agnostic” and “lean heavily” since Gen 4:1 is crystal clear, “Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, ‘I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord.’” In his video The Serpent Seed: Part 2 | Gen. 3 and the Tree | The Christian Contrarian Ep. 34, he states, “I’m not necessarily against the concept of Cain being the offspring of Satan and Eve.”

Having written a five book series contra the serpent see theory—see Cain as Serpent Seed of Satan—I know that such straightforward statements, with nothing to contradict them, are not enough for people who desperately want to support a theory which has been historically virtually unknown.

I note this because, for example, the Angel view of the Gen 6 affair was the original, traditional and majority view among the earliest Jews and Christians alike—see my book On the Genesis 6 Affair’s Sons of God: Angels or Not?—but the serpent seed theory is such a minority view, among anyone, that it hardly deserves a mention (I only wrote so much on it due to how the internet seems to make non-issues into, for some, a shibboleth: a litmus test.

Now, since Wayne suffers from Gigorexia Nervosa, he somehow ties something about which he’s “somewhat agnostic” into what he terms “giants.”

Now, for Cain to be Satan’s son we need a way for Satan to impregnate Eve—and, BTW, by serpent seed theorists logic (or, illogic—and ill-theo-logic) Adam also had sex with Satan since they symbolize eating the fruit of the forbidden tree as having sex and well, Adam also ate of it.

Wayne makes, at least, three errors at this point: he has the Gen 6 affair as involving “Seraphim Angels, who are the Watchers…fiery serpent Angels.” In the video The Serpent Seed: Part 2, he refers to, “Seraphim Angels which were serpent-faced Angels who are the Watchers in Genesis 6 and who produced giants Nephilim that looked just like them” which is a 99% inaccurate statement.

In fact, the one and only biblical text about Seraphim is Isa 6 which has it that “Each had six wings: with two he covered his face” so I’m unsure how Gary Wayne knows what their faces look like. Also, Angels don’t have wings but Seraphim (and Cherubim) do. Besides, we’ve no reliable physical description of Nephilim whatsoever and especially not their faces so I’m also unsure how Wayne knows what they looked like—well, I do: he waters down terminology, correlates the biblical concept of Nephilim to hybrid creatures referenced by Pagan cultures, and then actually incorporates Pagan teachings into what is supposed to be his biblical theology.

For some strange and un-elucidated reason, in his Nachash and Satan | Serpent Seed Part 3 | The Christian Contrarian Ep. 35 video, Gary Wayne argues that “Seraphim were recorded in Isaiah 6, six winged angels and that would give him a serpent type of form with the serpent face as seraph is defined”: I’ve no idea how having six wings equates having “a serpent type of form.”

In his video WHAT Did CAIN Do?! Gary Wayne: The Way of Cain: Serpent Seed Pt. 4 | Christian Contrarian Ep. 37, he actually stated, “in Isaiah 6, that’s where you get the Seraphim angels which are six winged fiery serpent-faced Angels” but that ranges from erroneous to confused.

Watchers is just a hip and trendy manner whereby to refer to Angles which came about during the Second Temple Era: millennia after the Torah was written.

There’s no such thing as “Seraphim Angels: that’s just a category error, it’s a mashing together of two different categories of being. Seraphim are Seraphim and Angels are Angels: they have different job titles, different job functions, and look different from one another—see my books What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology and What Does the Bible Say About Various Paranormal Entities? A Styled Paranormology.

Moreover, there’s no such thing as “fiery serpent Angels” and Seraphim are also not serpentine.

Besides, Satan is neither a Seraph nor an Angel nor serpentine: he’s a Cherub (Eze 28:14)—yet another category of being with a different job title, function, and look than Seraphim or Angels.

In the Nachash and Satan video, he noted, “we also learned in Ezekiel 28:13 that this anointed Cherub was in Eden, not necessarily in his Seraphic form but he was in Eden: maybe he was in his Seraphic form we don’t know, but he’s both Cherubim high priest and he’s also Seraphim.” This is just an incoherent series of category errors since he’s asserting that a Seraph has a serpentine form but can only change into a Cherub—or visa versa.

He followed directly with that this, “all makes sense as you as we look at Isaiah 6, and Satan would have had many titles.” Yet, that implies he’s committing a word-concept fallacy and also: he’s never called an Angel and never called a Seraph.

I realize that some will demand that Satan is serpentine due to what they read in English as the “serpent” in the garden yet, I deal with that in my book What Does the Bible Say About the Devil Satan? A Styled Satanology, the issue with which, in part, is that Rev 12:9 and 20:2 refer to, “the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan.” Thus, he’s symbolically called various things.

Yet, in his video The Serpent Seed: Part 2, Wayne stated, “Revelation 12 describes Satan as a serpent and a dragon which is the Seraphim Angel” which makes his claim even more incoherent.

In his video Nachash and Satan, he states, “Satan is a serpent, as described in Revelation 12” with which there are a lot of problem since he was speaking too generically.

The Gen 6 affair pertained to Angels who look just like human males. Seraphim and Cherubim don’t look just like human males and so, apparently, couldn’t mate with humans even if they wanted to.

BTW: we’re only about one minute into Gary Wayne’s video—which, sadly, speaks volumes about his approach to the Bible.

Incidentally, he goes on to note that he wants to “help other people, hopefully, to have an approach where you can test not only what I say, what I believe, but what others say” and so, that’s what we’re doing herein.

He notes that he uses, “a literal approach as opposed to the allegorical approach which is a Gnostic way of approaching scripture: that everything is an allegory and there’s hidden meanings.”

I really do hate to have to say this but the exact opposite seems to be the case on many issues, such as Nephilim and “giants”—which he and I debated—referring to serpentine Seraphim Angels, etc.

Most ironically, he stated, “I also like to take the Hebrew meanings and take the English back to Hebrew” since he admitted that he doesn’t know how big Nephilim and Og were but will still insist on calling them giants—even though in Gen 6 giants is merely rendering (not even translating) Nephilim which implies nothing about height whatsoever—just as Og is referred to as a Repha, which some also render (don’t translate) as giant even though that also implies nothing about height whatsoever—see my book Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010, since I can hear what some of you are thinking.

Gary Wayne goes on to state:

We are going to move into Genesis 4 and to look at one of the arguments that people will use to talk about Cain in a way that suggests that he’s not part of the lineage of Seth, that there are two separate lineages which suggests that Cain is the offspring of Satan and Eve as they like to conclude…they will say that that makes sense because of Targum, commentaries, and the Targum was created while Judah, the Southern Kingdom, was in exile in Babylon…

Specifically, that’s when Targumim began to be created and they continued to be created until circa the 600s AD. Also, Targumim actually range from being translations to being paraphrases—some lose enough to, perhaps, he called commentaries but that’s a stretch: it’s just that some, such as Pseudo-Jonathan (from the late 600s AD) contain so much Rabbinic folklore that it can’t be referred to as a strict translation in any sense of the word.

Now, Wayne having referred to Targum, singular, will cause problems since we know not to which one he’s referring. Thus, when he says, “using the Targum” and especially, “this Targum” and “that Targum” which “clearly says…” then his audience will have a hard time tracking down the one to which he’s referring.

In any case, he notes that the one he’s reading has it that, “Cain was the offspring of Satan and Eve” which, by definition, means that such was an assertion from millennia after the Torah was written—regardless of to which one he’s referring.

I will cut to the chase and note that serpent seed theorists will argue that Cain isn’t Adam’s son since he is not mentioned in Gen 5’s “book of the generations of Adam.” There are, at least, two simple issues here:

  1. Genealogies, particularly biblical ones, aren’t necessarily forensic lists of every single person in a genealogy. Rather, they tend to focus on a desired end: meaning that they include the relevant people that lead to relevant people—such as Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, in this case.
  2. If one argues that Cain’s not Adam’s son because he’s not in Gen 5 then, guess what, Abel also wasn’t Adam’s son since he’s also not listed therein. Now, one may argue that Abel’s not therein because he, himself, didn’t have children. Yet, that’s the point, is it not, he’s not listed for a reason, and there’s no indication that reason is that he’s not Adam’s son. Likewise, Cain absconded from Adam and Eve and began his own lineage plus, again, that didn’t serve the purposes of tracing from Adam and Eve to Noah, et al.

Wayne focuses on the terminology in Gen 4 and since I did that in my books I’ll leave the interested reader to those. In short, Gary Wayne notes, “In Genesis 4…Cain is the offspring of Adam and Eve and there’s no mention about Satan anywhere in there.”

See my various books here.

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page. You can comment here or on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.