The following verse has often been explained as the birth of Jesus. That is incorrect. This passage, in truth, describes the birth of Cain, the son of Satan.
Revelation 12: 4-5 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
Line by line meaning:
“And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood…”
Is this not understood to be the fall of Satan, the dragon, and the one third of heavens angels that he led in rebellion?
“and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered”
Is it not logical that the father would stand at the mother’s bedside at the birth of the child?
“for to devour her child as soon as it was born.”
In this context, the word “devour” means to claim, to possess, to take or take over; to assume authority and rights over the child.
“And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations”
Jesus did not rule all nations. He turned down the offer, remember? Scripture clearly shows who does own and rule all nations.
Matthew 4:8-9 Then the devil led Jesus to the top of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and all their splendor. The devil said, "If you will bow down and worship me, I will give you all these things."
“to rule all nations with a rod of iron”
A “rod of iron” would indicate tyranny and enslavement. Through various kingdoms which include both governments and religions, the lineage of Cain continues to rule the earth.
and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
Satan, the alien-angel, took possession of the child for a period of time.
Although Cain was the first born of Eve, he is not mentioned in Adam’s lineage. The following scriptures uphold the fact that Cain was not Adam’s son. The fact that Cain is not listed in the lineage of Adam in Genesis 5, 1 Chronicles, nor in the record of genealogy in Luke 4, gives speculation that he was an illegitimate son. (Cain stands alone in his lineage and his genealogy is listed separately.)
1 This is the family history of Adam.3 When Adam was 130 years old, he became the father of another son in his likeness and image, and Adam named him Seth.
6 When Seth was 105 years old, he had a son named Enosh.9 When Enosh was 90 years old, he had a son named Kenan
12 When Kenan was 70 years old, he had a son named Mahalalel
15 When Mahalalel was 65 years old, he had a son named Jared.
18 When Jared was 162 years old, he had a son named Enoch.
21 When Enoch was 65 years old, he had a son named Methuselah
25 When Methuselah was 187 years old, he had a son named Lamech
28 When Lamech was 182, he had a son.29 Lamech named his son Noah
32 After Noah was 500 years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth
This possibility is further substantiated by the fact that elsewhere in Scripture, a firstborn son's name is never omitted from a genealogy, though he may forfeit inheritance rights for improper behavior. (1 Chronicles 2:3, Gen 49:3-4)
And Man knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bore Cain, and said, I have acquired a man with Jehovah. (Darby translation)
This verse seems to imply the cause and effect , but that is incorrect.
“Adam knew Eve his wife”
This was a reconciliatory event. Satan has scorned her and admonished her to return to her husband. (Your desire shall be to your husband and he will rule over you.) It is the old story of a woman seduced, then discarded. Eve confesses when she realizes (or has been told what is happening to her) that “she acquired a man with ‘the Lord’.” By disobedience she has entered into a covenant with Satan and he now lords position over them.
1 John 3:12
Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother.
I hypothesize that this is a mistranslation in that the following statement was not made by our creators, but rather a comment from Satan to Eve. Here he tells her that the seed of his lineage and the human seed would always be enemies.
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he shall bruise (trample upon) thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Many people incorrectly assume that Jesus is this “enmity”.
Enmity means “enemy, hostility, state of war.”
These words were actually a warning that there would always be hostility between the pure human lineage of Adam and Eve and the bloodline that sprung from the angel alien and Eve.
He shall bruise thy head
The serpent would have the authority of headship; thus, control over the “head” indicates the leadership position. To this day this serpent line is exercising control and power over the human race through governments and religions.
and thou shalt bruise his heel
This indicates that the human race would show contempt for these powers being lorded over them, but that whatever they might do to combat it, humans would merely be a nuisance and would not be effective to change things.
In the last book of the Bible, scriptures tells us that this serpent lineage which is directing the beast even makes war with and overcomes the saints. The powers in this world were transferred to the progeny of evil alien-angels long ago.
Change can only come from divine intervention when our Creator(s) return.
The following scripture is taken from The Message bible. There are various translations which can be used for cross reference at http://www.biblegateway.com/ . I have chosen this text because it gets the point across in a more lively manner.
For a translation from the Septuagint: http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/24-psalms-nets.pdf
Let me tell you what God said next.
He said, "You're my son,
And today is your birthday.
What do you want? Name it:
Nations as a present? continents as a prize?
You can command them all to dance for you,
Or throw them out with tomorrow's trash."
Does this passage sound like a loving “god” who deserves devotion from humans? This “god” is not our Creator(s). The son referenced here is certainly not characteristic of Jesus.