The Serpent’s Four Lies

By: Dave Hunt; ©2000

Has the devil changed his tactics since he deceived Adam and Eve in the garden? Dave Hunt says “No.” In this article he explains how the same lies still work today.

 

The Serpent’s Four Lies

(from Occult Invasion, Harvest House, 1998)

The ultimate mystery cannot be impersonal because the impersonal cannot think, plan, organize, or create, and such capacities are absolutely necessary to bring the universe and especially intelligent life into existence. It takes personal beings even to realize that a mystery exists; and no impersonal “Force” could beget personal beings. It is not a matter of man, as Campbell insists, having a “tendency to personify” the impersonal because of some prejudice or wishful thinking or superstition. The fact is that rational thinking demands a rational explanation for the universe, and rationality must be personal.

Furthermore, the idea of a Force with a dark and a light side is refuted by the personal nature of the revelations received through occult means and upon which the occult is based. It is not merely power that is being manifested; there is a consistent philosophy accompanying the power that is inevitably communicated. Moreover, as we have already noted, that philosophy can be traced to a personal source: the serpent, or Satan. One of the most striking phenomena encountered by any investigator of the occult is the astonish­ing similarity between the specific lies which the Bible claims the serpent communicated to Eve in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:1-5) and the consistent philosophy underlying all occultism. These lies include the following:

1. God is not personal but a force. Although that concept is not stated explicitly, it is implicit in everything Satan said. “Did God say?” challenged the very idea of a personal God who would forbid Adam and Eve to eat of a certain tree. The logic was indisputable. How could the fruit of one particular tree be harmful when the fruit of all of the others was life-sustaining? They all grew out of the same ground. The same force was in all things—in the ground, in the tree, in the fruit and in her as well.
2. Death is not real; we don’t really die. Because the Force that is in all things resides in us as well, we can’t die; we just get “recycled.” This lie, of course, has been elaborated as reincarnation in Eastern mysticism and as spirit survival in Western occultism. It is the message that all of the so-called “clinically dead” come back with: Death is not real, and there is nothing to fear—no judgment, just love and acceptance and continued evolution­ary progress ever upward.
3. Man’s destiny is to become one of the gods. We are evolving upward into ever-higher species and ultimately will have reached the pinnacle of evolution: godhood.
4. The secret is knowledge of good (the “light side” of the Force) and evil (the “dark side” of the Force). This was surely the serpent’s rationale in persuading Eve to partake of the forbidden tree of the knowledge of good and evil. There is nothing wrong with us except the way we think. The power is already within us, but we are ignorant of that fact and need to be “enlightened.”

One can easily see the relationship between the serpent’s philosophy and the occult. For example, the January 1931 edition of The Occult Digest: A Magazine for Everybody offers a book titled The Serpent Power. The ad promises 700 pages with detailed instruc­tions in achieving “Serpent Power” through Kundalini Yoga along with “colored photographs of the yoga positions… and explanation of Serpent Power.” The same issue contains a Rosicrucian advertisement promising the development of a “sixth sense which will make you master of your destiny.” Another article, titled “Is Death Necessary?” declares, “Every thinker is agreed that the old world seems to be on the verge of some ‘mental’ or ‘spiritual’ discovery or awakening which might very easily upset every so-called fact dealing with life and death.”

Surely the obvious parallel with the biblical story of the Garden of Eden is, if nothing else, fascinating. The same 1931 edition of Occult Digest contained articles on reincarna­tion and on obtaining messages from the spirit world as well as articles promising that the development of these occult powers would lead to individual godhood—the same promise with which the serpent enticed Eve.

The story of the Garden of Eden is not myth; it is history. How else can one explain that the very same lies with which the Bible says the serpent deceived Eve have been avidly and gullibly pursued ever since then by her descendants? It is these very lies which make up the foundation of the occult.

What About “Right” and “Wrong”?

Some practicing witches claim that the power they draw upon can only be used in benevolent ways. Then what power do so-called “black magicians” use? Moreover, this claim seems to attribute morals to an impersonal Force. The fallacious concept of a Force innate in the cosmos with a “light” and “dark” side producing “white” and “black” magic has caused much confusion.

The whole idea of a “dark” and “light” side to the Force comes out of Eastern mysticism. It is found in Hinduism, where there is no sin, no right and wrong, each person’s dharma being an individual matter. It is found in Buddhism and Taoism, in the belief that there is a psychic Force, or ki, expressed by the yin and yang, neither of which is superior to the other, and neither of which is right or wrong, but both must be in balance. Acupuncture, for example, is the attempt to bring the yin and yang in the body into alignment. As William Devine, chairman of the California Acupuncture Association, has said:

Oriental medicine is like that. You could bring one patient in, five different practitioners could look at him and come up with five different diagnoses, and nobody’s wrong.^[1]

On the basis of what “Ramtha” (the 30,000-year-old warrior that J.Z. Knight channels) has said, we can be delivered from the idea of a judgmental God by understanding that “there is no sin, therefore no reason for guilt.”^[2] Of course, if no one is wrong, then no one is right either. Indeed, the very thought that someone might claim to be right is anathema in today’s amoral society. As Wade Davis insisted during an interview on the nationally syndicated Geraldo talk show, “There is no such thing as right or wrong in religion… that’s where wars come from.”^[3] Yet Jesus Christ claimed that all who rejected Him were not only wrong but eternally lost. Clearly a choice must be made between Jesus Christ and the world of the occult.

A Counterfeit Broad-Mindedness

The denial of right and wrong carries the logical consequence that every opinion must be equally valid. This folly masquerades as broad-mindedness but is in fact the worst kind of narrow-mindedness because it effectively eliminates all other points of view. It is exem­plified in the person who purports to agree with everyone and insists that even the widest differences are only a matter of “semantics.” Ironically, such professed tolerance of other viewpoints actually destroys them—not by a frontal assault, but by the impolite refusal to take them seriously. An antagonist who disagrees and is willing to discuss the issues is worthy of more respect than the one who, in his broad-minded desire to embrace every­thing and reject nothing, denies the very real distinctions between opposing views.

To many people such an “everybody wins” attitude is the only way to go, and it has come into the public schools to the detriment of our students. But if “loser” is to be dropped from our vocabulary then “winner” must go as well. Frustrated with programs put forth by the psychology profession to solve social problems, programs which hold no one account­able for being wrong, T.H. Fitzgerald wrote in an AHP Perspective article:

The sense I still get around AHP [Association for Humanistic Psychology] is.,. that everybody is somehow right “from their perspective” because there can be no ultimate arbiter. Dennis Jaffe writes… about the Search for Excellence, but if there is to be Excellence, must there not also be Non-Excellence, and what do we say when we meet it on the road…?

Even the language for the discussion of moral issues has been corrupted by psychological cant and the vocabulary of positivist scientism.^[4]

One of the most common examples of this absolute intolerance that poses as total tolerance is found in the well-known aphorism, most often used in reference to religion, “We’re all taking different roads to get to the same place.” While that declaration sounds broad-minded to a fault, it clearly represents the ultimate in narrow-mindedness. Although “different roads” are generously tolerated, they are not allowed to lead to different places, for everyone, no matter what road they take, must go to the same place.

So this seemingly broad-minded idea of “all taking different roads” allows for only one destination. In fact, the Bible, in true broad-mindedness, says there are two destinations— heaven and hell—and no one is forced to go to either. The choice is up to each individual. However, for those who want to reach heaven, there is only one way: through Jesus Christ and His death, burial, and resurrection in payment of the penalty that His own infinite jus­tice demanded for sin.

The Embrace That Smothers

It is by such “all roads” sophistry that Hinduism has gained its reputation for tolerance toward all religions. Hinduism does indeed embrace all faiths, but in the process they are absorbed into Hinduism by the “embrace that smothers.” Whatever the Hindu in his prover­bial broad-mindedness seems to accept loses its former identity and is recast in a Hindu mold. Hinduism is quite willing, for example, to embrace Christ. After all, with 330 million gods, adding one more changes nothing. And unless those who present The Jesus Film and other missionary efforts among Hindus clearly point out what is wrong with the Hindu approach, and contrast the uniqueness of Christ that distinguishes Him from all Hindu avatars, spurious conversions by the thousands could occur.

Unless the distinction has been made very clear, Hindus who seemingly “accept Jesus” do not accept the Jesus of the Bible, the Jesus who is God become man through the virgin birth and is the only “way, truth, and life.” The “Jesus” which a Hindu accepts is just one more avatar among thousands. Thus in “accepting Jesus” Hinduism destroys the Jesus of the Bible and creates its own pseudo-Christ.

Such delusion is a major objective of occult entities who communicate with mankind. The words spoken by the “Jesus” who gave Barbara Marx Hubbard a “powerful born-again experience,” like those of the “Jesus” who dictated A Course in Miracles to psychologist Helen Shucman, present a very clever perversion of what the biblical Jesus has to say.

Likewise, The Urantia Book, allegedly put together by a “commission of twenty-four spiritual administrators acting in accordance with a mandate issued by high deity authorities (the Ancients of Days),”^[5] totally perverts the Bible, and especially with regard to Jesus. In all such communications from “higher beings” there is a reinterpretation of meanings which effectively destroys historic Christianity and replaces it with a Hindu/Buddhist, pseudo-Christianity that plays into the hands of the occult. As this attitude spreads, we are seeing the preparation of the coming world religion.

This counterfeit broad-mindedness with its contempt for truth is carried to the masses by today’s most popular televangelist, Robert Schuller, who broad-mindedly declares that “we can tell the good religion from the bad religion” by whether it is “positive.” He has called upon “religious leaders… whatever their theology… to articulate their faith in positive terms… [in a] massive, united effort by leaders of all religions… [to proclaim] the positive power… of world-community-building religious values.”^[6]

The fact that the theologies of Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Catholicism, and evangelicalism contradict one another on vital points is apparently nothing to be concerned about so long as each is presented “in positive terms.” All religions, Schuller seems to think, represent equally valid “world-community-building religious values.” Antichrist himself couldn’t improve on that New Age double-talk!

Notes

1. ↑ Walter Yeeling Evans-Wentz, The Fairy-Faith in Celtic Countries (University Books, Inc., 1966) p. 401.
2. ↑ Elk, Sacred Pipe, p. 45.
3. ↑ Ibid., p. 56.
4. ↑ Ibid., pp. 124-25.
5. ↑ Ibid., pp. 7, 45.
6. ↑ Evans-Wentz, Fairy-Faith, inside back of jacket.