Greetings friends, I have often wondered if Satan has a female counterpart. If Satan masquerades as the Queen of Heaven, it doesn’t seem like the Bible would refer to her so distinctly so often. Or perhaps one of Satan’s chief princes plays the role of the Queen of Heaven and is responsible to use and guide whatever human female is the penultimate evil henchwoman of the world at any given time, such as Semiramis was for her lifetime, in ancient history.

Or maybe in some way that we don’t understand a chief prince was redesigned to permanently be a chief “princess” so as to always be the Queen of Heaven. Some might opine that a high level demon could be behind the Queen of Heaven. The fact that a master-devil and other underling demons would be involved is obvious. However, in my estimation, a high level demon would not have the power and long–term presence, such as a fallen angel would have, to do all that is necessary to fulfill that role over the ages.

While the Bible is fairly explicit concerning certain issues, many times we see hints or must make indirect references. For example we can see from reading the gospels that Jesus passed by the Gate Beautiful many times. In Acts chapter 3 we read of the man lame from birth who daily sat by the pool near the Gate Beautiful hoping for a healing.

Why didn’t Jesus heal him? We can only surmise that the Father wanted to use Peter and John at that time. Jesus may have even asked the Father about this man when he passed by the pool. The scriptures do not actually directly support my conjectures. So while I am safe to posit that this is a possible reason I cannot make it a doctrine. Still I am free to make the conjectures which I made concerning the reason the lame man was not healed by Jesus, but was healed later by Peter & John by Jesus’ power & authority.

Here is another example of where I may form a theory, but where I must realize that I have only indirect reference rather than direct substantial points that could be used to
form a doctrine.
Jer 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.
Jer 4:24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.
Jer 4:25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.
Jer 4:26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.

How could there be fully built cities but no humans? First there is a hint here and other places in scripture concerning the possibility of a pre-adamic civilization. However it is indirect. This does not mean that I am forbidden to make a theory concerning the issue.

As long as I am upfront that my teaching is not directly scriptural but based on indirect evidence I should be free to make an educated opinion on the topic. Note also that this verse does seem to tie into Genesis 1:1 and 2. Keep in mind that the English versions of scripture for this Genesis reference points to a creation of something from nothing while the original language makes a case for something being recreated from something.

So while I cannot dogmatically make a doctrinal statement here, in my opinion, it does seem plausible that there was a pre-adamic civilization. That said, it seems there are two possibilities here concerning the reference in Jeremiah. One, the Lord punished mankind to the point that they all died leaving only their ruined cities. Or two, there were no men because the inhabitants were humanoid. If that was the case were they fully angelic, an early version of a hybrid, or some other class of humanoid being such as gigantopithicus or reptoidal creature? All this to say that certain issues, while being mocked in general by Christendom, may have some basis in reality, but are mysteries that are only hinted at in scripture, yet evidenced in non-scriptural sources. For example, almost every home here in the state where I live, Wisconsin, owns a radio or television. Neither item is mentioned in scripture. Does that make them non-existent?
Of course not.

Back to the female counterpart issue I originally started blogging about. Many respected Christian teachers claim that all fallen angels are male. According to scripture I cannot disagree with that teaching. Only in Zachariah will you find an example of female entities with wings and they resemble the Harpies or Chimeras of legend more than angels. And of course, for those who have studied angiology, most types of angels do not have wings as do, for example, the cherub class. If one studies the mythologies of various cultures there are countless goddesses from Athena to Zorya. If you investigate you find that certain entities like the goddess Venus were known by many names, such as Isis, Astarte, Astor, Inanna or Aphrodite, et. al, depending on the worshipper’s culture.

While it is easy just to form a blanket conclusion that the idea of the actual existence of such goddesses is merely pagan myth with no basis in reality, the great preponderance of such tales, over time, leads me to believe there must be some kernel of truth hidden here. I assure you, these fallen angels are as real as the Prince of Persia that withstood the angel sent to Daniel for twenty one days. Indeed both fallen archons, and demon spirits, are the very entities that form the principalities and powers command structure that Paul says that we war against in the spirit, as they attempt to manage the world on behalf of their master Satan.

My guess is that either fallen angels can take on the form of a female at least temporarily or that the hybrid offspring of such angelic and human couplings may be male or female. You won’t find evidence for this in scripture, so we shouldn’t make a doctrine, but we should be free to consider the possibilities and expound upon them.

While we see for example Goliath, who was technically the son of a giant, mentioned in scripture, we don’t see examples of female giants in the Bible. Both in modern history and ancient history we find a plethora of evidence for female giants. For a good source of study concerning giants check out Stephen Quayle’s book Genesis 6 Giants. If we study early historical teachings from non-canonical sources we do see evidence for such theories, for example, as the existence of literal feminine dark kingdom entities or female giants. However, we must always remember that while such historical sources may fill in gaps and substantiate our theories, that the produced data is not scripture.

We must also remember that certain historical sources, like the various global flood legends, are merely warped versions of the true flood story as recorded in Genesis.