The Second Coming of Saturn

Angelic Councils and Occultic Conspiracies
(The Second Coming of Saturn)

Claim 1: There is a divine council which consists of angels, presided over by God the Father and the Son, His vice-regent.
- Evidence: Job 1 (38:7)
Claim 2: The fallen angels have their own council, presided over by Satan.
- Evidence: Psalm 82 (Dan. 10:13). Revelation 12 also implies that Satan rules over his own group of fallen angels. He directs them to accomplish his evil purposes. These angels apparently fell at one time in history, not over an extended period.
Claim 3: The Watchers of Genesis 6 were led by Shemjaza.
- Evidence: Book of Enoch
- Critique: Shemjaza is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible. While it may be assumed that a particular angel (under Satan’s authority) led the Mt. Hermon rebellion, it is not explicitly stated in Scripture. These fallen Watchers were no doubt already a part of Satan’s rebellious band that was cast out of Heaven at an earlier time.
Claim 4: Shemjaza is the same entity behind the god Saturn/Kronos/Enlil of Greco-Roman/Near Eastern myth.
- Evidence: Comparison of Enoch with interrelated pagan myths.
- Critique: Myths are convoluted. It is impossible to demonstrate one-to-correspondence between them and the Bible. We can find seeds of truth, but these are surrounded by deception, imagination, and confused traditions.
  - Indeed, some of the characters of mythology appear to be related to Biblical personalities (e.g., Pandora and Eve). It appears that stories of the fallen angels and their offspring were superimposed on stories of the ancestors. In other cases, it might have been vice-versa.
  - Gilbert’s idea that Zeus/Baal is Satan would lead one to the conclusion that Shemjaza at one time held a position of prominence over Satan before the latter gave way to the former. The New Testament does not support this at all.
Claim 5: Shemjaza is the “divine” figure mentioned in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, not Satan.
- Evidence: Possible etymological connection (i.e., Shejaza is Enlil and Enlil is “Lucifer”) and reference to a mount and an abyss.
- Critique: None of the above actually proves Gilbert’s point. Indeed, Shemjaza’s sin was descending to Earth (to procreate with women). Lucifer’s sin was the opposite: he wished to ascend to the mount of God in Heaven. Ironically, on this point Gilbert departs from the church fathers he often relies on. They believed this was a picture of Satan. Moreover, a comparison of Jesus’ statement in Luke 10:18 with Isaiah 14 cements the view that Satan is the fallen star referred to as Lucifer (or “Helel”). According to Gilbert’s own methodology, Lucifer seems associated with Baal (Satan) and the mount in question is Zaphon, not Hermon. Lastly, Isaiah 14:15 (compare Ez. 28:17 and Rev. 12:12) could imply a future judgment. This would not fit Gilbert’s historical reading of the text.
Claim 6: According to New Age expectations, Shemjaza will be released from the Abyss as Apollyon.
- Evidence: Revelation 6 does describe the release of fallen angels and their monsters. Moreover, New Age predictions, such as the prophecy of Virgil, seem to agree with this, albeit New Age exponents cast this event in a positive light.
  - This return to the “Golden Age” of the gods could be, in truth, a return to the pre-Flood angelic rebellion which produced the Nephilim.
- Critique: The text seems to imply that the one leading the locusts is not bound in the abyss. Apollyon (the angel of the bottomless pit) is actually the one setting them free. The identity is unknown, but it is most likely Satan who comes to destroy (John 10:10). Of course, if Shemjaza is a real entity then he could very well be released at this time.
Claim 7: Some of our Founders were part of a Satanic conspiracy to be revealed in the End Times.
- Evidence: Layout of D.C. (occultic), Masonic roots of certain Founding Fathers (expressed in American symbols), description in Revelation 18 of “Babylon the Great” as a place of commercial power
- Critique: Though the U.S. could be Babylon the Great, there is simply not enough data to support the view. Most likely, Babylon will be Rome as the center of a Revived Roman Empire. However, it is possible that the Antichrist could be American, and America at the time of his rise to power could be subservient to a United Europe (based in Rome). The “little horn” (Dan. 7) will then rise within the midst of this coalition and eventually supplant it. If this scenario is correct, the designation “Babylon” could shift from Rome (Rev. 17) to somewhere in the U.S. (Rev. 18- D.C. or New York?).
  - Rome had two phases: Senate-ruled and Emperor-ruled. The “little horn” begins his career during the first phase and, after being assassinated (like Julius), rises to the status of Emperor. The two chapters on Babylon in Revelation (17 and 18) deal with these stages respectively.

Latin	English
Ultima Cumaei venit iam carminis aetas;	Now is come the final era of the Sibyl‘s song;
Magnus ab integro saeclorum nascitur ordo.	The great order of the ages is born afresh.
iam redit et Virgo, redeunt Saturnia regna,	now justice returns, honored rules return (or return of Saturn’s reign);
iam nova progenies caelo demittitur alto.	now a new lineage is sent down from high heaven.