Denouncing the "serpent seed" false teaching
Essential Background:
https://www.thethirdheaventraveler.com/2024/07/the-study-of-scripture-for-doctrine-and_31.html
https://www.thethirdheaventraveler.com/2025/01/let-us-examine-ourselves-gospel-kjv.html
The Serpent Seed Theory: A Biblical Denunciation
Here, "seed" (Hebrew zera') denotes posterity—future descendants in a collective, prophetic sense— not literal sperm or semen.
This verse foretells ongoing spiritual conflict between humanity's lineage (culminating in Christ) and evil's influence, not a genetic hybrid birth. The theory's claim of Eve's seduction by the serpent as the "forbidden fruit" sexual act ignores the text's symbolic curse on the serpent and promise of redemption.
Furthermore, Genesis 4:1 (KJV) explicitly states, "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." "Knew" refers to carnal knowledge—marital intimacy between Adam and Eve—resulting in Cain's conception. Eve attributes Cain's birth to God's aid, not Satan's. The subsequent mention of Abel in Genesis 4:2 implies the same union produced both brothers, with no hint of dual paternity.
This clear paternal attribution to Adam refutes any serpent involvement, aligning with 1 John 3:12 (KJV), which calls Cain "of that wicked one" in a moral, not biological, sense—evil actions, not evil blood.
Connections from Cain's Descendants to Later Figures
While denouncing serpent seed's core claim, some interpretations connect Cain's line (Genesis 4:17-24 KJV) to broader evil influences without literal serpent paternity. Cain's descendants, such as Lamech's family, are seen as culturally corrupt. Their daughters—"daughters of men" (Genesis 6:2 KJV)—allegedly intermarried with "sons of God" (fallen angels), producing Nephilim giants (Genesis 6:4 KJV), hybrid offspring embodying pre-flood wickedness (Genesis 6:5-7 KJV).
Post-flood, this influence purportedly survives through Ham's wife (speculative, not explicit in Scripture), carrying tainted genetics. Ham's son Cush fathered Nimrod, "a mighty hunter before the LORD" (Genesis 10:8-9 KJV), founder of Babel's rebellion (Genesis 11:1-9 KJV), symbolizing post-flood tyranny.
This line extends to the Herodian dynasty: Herod the Great, of Edomite (Esau's posterity, Genesis 36 KJV) descent via Canaanite intermarriages, ruled as a false king, slaughtering innocents (Matthew 2:16 KJV).
The Pharisees, opposed by Jesus, are called "generation of vipers" (Matthew 23:33 KJV) with "your father the devil" (John 8:44 KJV), implying moral alignment with evil (John 8:42-58 KJV), not genetics—lies and murder like Satan.
Finally, Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 (KJV) warn of "them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan," interpreted as false infiltrators (like Judaizers, Galatians 2:4 KJV) perpetuating enmity, echoing Genesis 3:15's posterity conflict without serpent seed literalism.
When Cain was the first born of man after the fall from the garden born into SIN see Romans 3:10, 23 KJV… (For ALL have sinned, and there is none righteous born). He committed the first sin after the fall in the Garden by murdering his brother. The curse that Cain received by a mark and being an outcast throughout the earth. Taking Genesis and the Apocrypha Jubilees historical evidence of Nephlim bloodlines coming into the bloodline of Cain through one of his daughters connects to HAM’s Wife to post flood which connects NIMROD to Esau’s lineage through his daughters intermarrying in the Edomite (Edomites are "Hamitic-mixed" from Esau's Canaanite wives—fulfilling Genesis 28:9's pattern of Esau seeking "wives from the daughters of Canaan" (Ham's line). This sets a precedent for hybrid identity.
bloodlines continue to the Hashemoneon and Herodian bloodlines to current Luciferian bloodlines in Royalty.
Insert commentary from The Curious Observer:
Whoa! You made a connection between Esau-Edom & Cain that I never even considered.
It really does go all the way back.
Makes sense considering the scripture:
"Amalek (grandsons of Esau-Edom) will war with the Lord from generation to generation".
Cain >> Amalek = Evil
Exodus 17:16
16 For he said, Because the Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.
My commentary:
Yes, awesome... perfect scripture in this connection you made with will war with the Lord from generation to generation. God says, "Esau have I hated." These bloodlines forfeited their inheritance. The Amalek connection - as you know Saul was commanded to kill every single living soul even the animals of the Amalek. When Saul disobeyed, he lost his kingdom and the descendants of those remaining Amalekites almost wiped out all the jews in Persia during the time of Esther. Remember Haman?
This scriptural chain illustrates a divine pattern: rejection of Esau's line leads to Amalek's rise, the command for total judgment, the peril of partial obedience, and ultimate deliverance for Israel. It's a sobering reminder of generational consequences and God's faithfulness amid human failure. If you'd like full chapters, expansions, or cross-references (e.g., Deuteronomy 25:17-19 on remembering Amalek1. The Prophecy of Enmity and Esau's Forfeited Inheritance Genesis 25:23 (The oracle to Rebekah about her twins, Jacob and Esau, setting the stage for divided destinies and Esau's line as adversaries):
"And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger."
This foreshadows Esau (the elder) and his descendants losing primacy to Jacob/Israel.
Genesis 25:29-34 (Esau sells his birthright, literally forfeiting his inheritance for a meal):
"Thus Esau despised his birthright...
And Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright."
Esau's bloodline thus begins under a curse of rejection.
Malachi 1:2-3 (God's direct hatred of Esau's line, echoed in the New Testament):
"I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness."
This prophetic hatred targets Esau's Edomite descendants, including Amalek.
Romans 9:13 (Paul quotes Malachi to affirm God's sovereign choice):
"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."biblegateway.com2. Amalek's Emergence as Esau's Descendant and the Vow of Eternal War
This establishes the Amalekite bloodline as an extension of Esau's rejected inheritance.
Genesis 36:12 (Amalek as grandson of Esau via Eliphaz and Timna):
"And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau's son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek: these [be] the sons of Adah Esau's wife."kingjamesbibleonline.orgThis is the core declaration of generational warfare you mentioned, tying Amalek's aggression directly to divine judgment on Esau's line.
Exodus 17:16 (After Israel's victory over Amalek at Rephidim, Moses' altar and God's oath of perpetual conflict):
"For he said, Because the LORD hath sworn [that] the LORD [will] have war with Amalek from generation to generation."biblegateway.com3. Saul's Command to Eradicate Amalek and the Cost of Disobedience God revisits the Amalekite threat centuries later, commanding total destruction to fulfill the generational war.
1 Samuel 15:2-3 (Samuel relays God's explicit order to Saul):
"Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember [that] which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid [wait] for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."kingjamesbibleonline.org1 Samuel 15:8-9 (Saul's partial obedience—he spares King Agag and the best livestock):
"And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword. But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all [that was] good, and would not utterly destroy them..."
1 Samuel 15:22-23 (Samuel rebukes Saul, equating disobedience to idolatry):
"And Samuel said, Hath the LORD [as great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey [is] better than sacrifice, [and] to hearken than the fat of rams. For rebellion [is as] the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness [is as] iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from [being] king.Saul's mercy toward Agag allows Amalekite remnants to survive, sowing seeds for future threats.
1 Samuel 15:28 (The kingdom is torn from Saul):
"And Samuel said unto him, The LORD hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, [that is] better than thou."biblegateway.com4. The Amalekite Legacy: Haman and the Plot in Persia. The spared Agag line reemerges in Haman, whose genocidal scheme nearly fulfills the generational enmity.Esther 3:1 (Haman introduced as an "Agagite," linking him to the Amalekite king Saul spared):
"After these things did king Ahasuerus promote Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him, and set his seat above all the princes that [were] with him."
Jewish tradition and biblical implication confirm Haman as a descendant of Agag, carrying forward the bloodline's hatred.
Esther 3:6 (Haman's plot to destroy all Jews, echoing Amalek's ancient ambush):
"And he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone; for they had shewed him the people of Mordecai: wherefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that [were] throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, [even] the people of Mordecai."
Through Esther and Mordecai, God thwarts this, but it underscores how Saul's incomplete obedience enabled this near-extinction event.
Esther 9:24 (Retrospective on Haman's scheme, tying it explicitly to his Agagite heritage):
"Because Haman the son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, the enemy of all the Jews, had devised against the Jews to destroy them, and had cast Pur, that [is], the lot, to consume them, and to destroy them;"
Additional Notes:
Regarding the Serpent Seed teaching that is making the rounds on social media.
The Serpent - Satan - had sexual intercourse with Eve. Those who believe Satan was the father of Cain do not understand and have not read Genesis 3:15 and 4:1,2 KJV.
Adam and Even were without doubt the parents of both Cain and Abel. In Genesis 3:15 KJV it is written “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”
In context here we know God is talking directly to the "Serpent" a - Satan himself who has appeared as a serpent or possessed the serpent speaking through it. Scripture is not clear but we know this serpent is speaking and it is Satan himself speaking through this creature.
The word “Seed” H2233 Strongs in context means POSTERITY and not sperm or offspring. We know it is posterity because of the complete hermeneutics of comparing scripture in context with Genesis 4:1,2.
Briefly POSTERITY means in this context "future, future time; after-generation, meaning legacy or lineage ... inheritance and not a a DNA offspring;" literally "the condition of coming after," from posterus "coming after, subsequent.
Here is detailed background on this tha is best exhibited by an opposing argument by a "Serpent Seed" apologist on social media.
Please read their opposing views to mine and my response:
Love ya Andrew but I completely disagree. The last definition and rarely used is posterity. Seed means offspring throughout the entire Bible. Show me anywhere it means posterity. Why would God say to the serpent after he BEGUILED Eve that her seed would crush his head and his SEED would bruise her heel???? Why say it it if it means posterity? That makes no sense. Her posterity will crush his head etc? No. It means offspring. Her children will crush his children head. This IS the line of Cain. If he wasn’t the serpents son, why did he kill his brother. The devil came to what? Steal, kill and destroy.
My Response:
First, you didn't mention the proof of my statement in Genesis 4:1,2 KJV. It is clearly written. Did you see that?
Now to respond to your comment and questions:
Ok line by line: YOu write: " Seed means offspring throughout the entire Bible. Show me anywhere it means posterity. "
Me: "No, there are numerous scriptures meaning posterity here are some examples...
The word "seed" appears over 200 times in the KJV and frequently means "descendants" or "posterity" (e.g., in patriarchal promises). Below are 10 key examples, focused on contexts of inheritance, covenants, or future generations FUTURE POSTERITY:
My favorites: Galatians 3:29 and Romans 4:16 KJV:
Galatians 3:29
“And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
King James Version (KJV)
Romans 4:16
“Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,”
A Few others in the Old Testament stemming from Genesis 3:15 KJV:
Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Genesis 4:25
And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.
Genesis 9:9
And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you.
Genesis 12:7
And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.
Genesis 13:15
For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.
Genesis 13:16
And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.
Genesis 15:5
And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.
Genesis 15:13
And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years.
Psalm 22:30
(Note: Often translated as "posterity" in modern versions.)
A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a
Isaiah 61:9
(Note: "Posterity" in some translations.)
And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the LORD hath blessed.
Next: YOu write: quote:
Why would God say to the serpent after he BEGUILED Eve that her seed would crush his head and his SEED would bruise her heel????
My response:
God didn't say that in Genesis 3:15 KJV.
This is what God said, paraphrasing: " the POSTERITY OF Eve = Jesus Christ - would destroy the Devil and the Devil would do cause pain and suffering to Jesus Christ at His crucifixion - bruise heel in this context of Genesis 3:15 KJV:
Genesis 3:15 in the King James Version (KJV): "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." This verse, spoken by God to the serpent interpreted as Satan immediately after the Fall in Eden, is often called the protoevangelium—the "first gospel"—as it foreshadows God's redemptive plan through the Messiah.
It establishes an ongoing conflict between the serpent's children in Posterity (JESUS TOLD THE PHARISEES in John 8:42-58 "Abraham is not your father, your FATHER IS THE DEVIL..." (humanity aligned with evil) and the woman's seed (ultimately fulfilled in Jesus Christ), culminating in victory for the latter.
The Deep Theological Meaning of "Bruise His Heel"At its core, the "bruise his heel" clause symbolizes temporary suffering and apparent defeat as the cost of ultimate triumph.
Here's a breakdown:The Serpent's Action (Bruising the Heel): The serpent—representing Satan—inflicts a wound on the heel of the woman's seed. In biblical typology, this "heel" points to Jesus' incarnation, ministry, and especially his crucifixion. The devil, through human agents and the powers of sin and death, "bruised" Jesus' heel by orchestrating his betrayal, trial, scourging, and nailing to the cross (e.g., the nails piercing his feet).
This was a moment of intense agony and seeming loss: Jesus cried out, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Psalm 22:1; Matthew 27:46). Yet, a heel wound, while excruciating, is not fatal—it impairs but does not destroy. It represents Satan's limited power: he can cause pain and delay victory, but he cannot prevent it.
Contrast with the Head Bruise: The verse's structure is chiastic and asymmetrical for emphasis—the seed crushes the serpent's head (a lethal blow, symbolizing the decisive defeat of Satan's dominion over sin, death, and hell through Jesus' resurrection and exaltation). Satan's "heel bruise," by contrast, is minor and preparatory.
The GREAT IRONY HERE: this wound "served the purpose of God," turning Satan's scheme against him: the cross exposed sin's ugliness, satisfied divine justice, and became the instrument of redemption (Colossians 2:15; Hebrews 2:14-15).
Broader Implications:Redemptive Cost: God's grace is not cheap; it demands the Savior's voluntary suffering. The heel bruise underscores incarnation's vulnerability—Jesus, fully man - the son of man - in the LIKENESS of man = experienced temptation, rejection, and death (Hebrews 4:15)—yet this very humility crushes evil.
Ongoing War: The enmity persists today (Ephesians 6:12), with believers as the seed's extension facing "heel bruises" (trials, persecution). But assurance lies in the head-crushing promise: Satan's defeat began at Calvary and will be finalized at Christ's return (Revelation 20:10). " end quote...
You write: quote:
"Why say it it if it means posterity? That makes no sense. Her posterity will crush his head etc? No. It means offspring. Her children will crush his children head. This IS the line of Cain."
My Response:
Eve's "children" plural..No. It would be child because as I hope you know, This is referring to JESUS CHRIST.
Posterity means “THAT WHICH COMES AFTER in the chain of descendants extending forward from an individual or a family. Inheritance.
The reason this of paramount importance is based on Jesus Christ and his DIVINE CONCEPTION in the Womb - not OVUM. He could not be of the first Adam. If he would have had Joseph's sperm - DNA or Mary's Ovum DNA he would have been born into sin. But. scripture is clear Jesus Christ was sinless and is the LAST ADAM not the FIRST.
And so it is written: “The first man Adam was made a living soul.” The last Adam was made a quickening Spirit. 1 Corinthians 15:45 KJV.
Jesus had to be the inheritance (POSTERITY) NOT offspring - LITERAL DNA Bloodline of the Line of King David. Which he was by POSTERITY from Joseph's bloodlines and by Mary's bloodlines.
I did a major study on the conception of Jesus Christ in the womb of Mary and and seed of Mary and we find the exact same issue here REGARDING SEED.
https://www.thethirdheaventraveler.com/2022/09/he-that-hath-seen-me-hath-seen-father.html.
POSTERITY is huge when we truly understand the full meaning of this word in this context. If you take time to get into the hard copy OXFORD ENGLISH Dictionary which I use and never the online or corrupted dictionaries. You find in this context on page 2252 in the full context of Genesis 3:15 KJV it literally means “THE STATE OF BEING LATER or OF A SUBSEQUENT TIME in the context of LINEAGE. INHERITANCE.
We inherit the Kingdom of God when we are saved in the very same manner. A different topic for a different day.
So, let's Look at this as the ongoing lineage that would inherit estates, titles, and responsibilities—echoing biblical themes of "seed" as enduring bloodlines (e.g., Genesis 3:15, where the woman's seed promises a future redemptive posterity). Posterity literally evoked the idea of "that which comes after"—not just abstract future time, but specifically the chain of human descendants extending forward from an individual or family.
Regarding Jesus Christ who is the SEED referred to from EVE in Genesis 3:15 this is not the DNA Bloodlines of Eve but rather her hereditary lineage after her.
"womb" in the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible—particularly in descriptions of Jesus' conception—was never confused or mistranslated from "ovum" (the Latin/Greek term for "egg" or female gamete). The KJV translators accurately rendered the original Greek text, and there's no historical or linguistic evidence of such a mix-up in biblical scholarship or translation history. Let me explain step by step, with context from the verse you seem to reference.
1. The Key Verse: Luke 1:31 in the KJV
KJV Text: "And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS."
This announces the virgin birth to Mary. Similar phrasing appears in Luke 2:21 and echoes Matthew 1:18–23 (the angel's message to Joseph: Mary "was found with child of the Holy Ghost").
2. Original Greek and Translation Accuracy
The Greek phrase is καὶ ἰδοὺ συλλήμψῃ ἐν γαστρὶ καὶ τέξῃ υἱόν (kai idou syllēmpsē en gastri kai texē huion).
Συλλήμψῃ (syllēmpsē): "You will conceive" or "take into" (from syllambanō, meaning to seize or receive, often used for pregnancy).
Ἐν γαστρὶ (en gastri): "In [the] womb" or "in belly." Gastēr (γαστήρ) specifically refers to the womb or uterus as the organ of gestation—not an egg cell.
KJV's "womb" is a precise English equivalent for gastēr, drawn from the 1611 translators' work with the Textus Receptus (Byzantine Greek manuscripts). Earlier English Bibles like the Geneva (1560) and Bishops' (1568) also use "womb" or "matrix" (an archaic term for uterus).
No "Ovum" Involved: The Greek word for "egg" is ōon (ὠόν), which doesn't appear in New Testament conception passages. Ancient Greek biology (e.g., Aristotle) did discuss eggs in animal reproduction, but biblical authors used gastēr or koilia (belly/womb) for human pregnancy, focusing on divine formation rather than gametes.”
"As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever" (Luke 1:55).
Here, "seed" means Abraham's descendants (the Jewish people, including Mary as a descendant of David/Abraham). It's not about Mary's own "seed" or Jesus specifically—it's praising God's faithfulness to the covenant promises (Genesis 12:7; 22:18). This occurs right after the announcement, during Mary's visit to Elizabeth, so it's thematically linked but not a direct reference to her conception
In Genesis 4:1,2 KJV it is written: “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
In the Bible the verb “to know” in the context of Genesis 4:1 means to have carnal knowledge otherwise known as to have sexual intercourse. Eve became pregnant from Adam and Cain was born from that union and Eve clearly says: I HAVE GOTTEN A MAN FROM THE LORD. Certainly she would not say this IF the Serpent impregnated her.
Additional:
The Serpent Seed doctrine (which posits a literal sexual union between Eve and the serpent, producing Cain as hybrid "offspring") crumbles under scrutiny of the Hebrew term zera' (זֶרַע), translated as "seed" in Genesis 3:15: "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." Here, zera' primarily evokes posterity—that which "follows after," i.e., future generations or descendants in a collective, non-literal sense—rather than biological sperm or immediate hybrid offspring.
This aligns with the verse's poetic parallelism, depicting ongoing enmity between two lines of descendants (serpent's followers vs. woman's godly line), not a one-time genetic event.
Why "Posterity" Fits (and Serpent Seed Doesn't)
Hebrew Nuance of Zera': From roots meaning "to sow" or "disseminate," zera' is flexible: it can denote literal seed/semen (e.g., agricultural or ejaculate), a single child, or a collective group of descendants/posterity. In prophetic or covenantal contexts like Gen 3:15, it's metaphorical for enduring lineages, emphasizing spiritual/moral opposition over biology. The syntax (collective noun with singular verb/pronoun like "it shall bruise") often signals posterity, not a singular "sperm" event.
Rejection of Serpent Seed: This 20th-century fringe theory (popularized by figures like William Branham) ignores the text's silence on any serpent-Eve intercourse—Eve's conception of Cain is straightforwardly attributed to Adam (Gen 4:1: "Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain"). It also misreads zera' as exclusively literal "sperm," forcing a dual-seed biology unsupported by Hebrew grammar or broader canon (e.g., no "evil bloodline" in NT genealogies). Mainstream exegesis sees Gen 3:15 as the protoevangelium (first gospel hint), promising ultimate victory through the woman's singular "seed" (Messiah) over the serpent (Satan), with collective enmity along the way.
When Cain was the first born of man after the fall from the garden born into SIN see Romans 3:10, 23 KJV… (For ALL have sinned, and there is none righteous born). He committed the first sin after the fall in the Garden by murdering his brother. The curse that Cain received by a mark and being an outcast throughout the earth. Taking Genesis and the Apocrypha Jubilees historical evidence of Nephilim bloodlines coming into the bloodline of Cain through one of his daughters connects to HAM’s Wife to post flood which connects NIMROD to Esau’s lineage through his daughters intermarrying in the Edomite (Edomites are "Hamitic-mixed" from Esau's Canaanite wives—fulfilling Genesis 28:9's pattern of Esau seeking "wives from the daughters of Canaan" (Ham's line). This sets a precedent for hybrid identity.
bloodlines continue to the Hashemoneon and Herodian bloodlines to current Luciferian bloodlines in Royalty.
Comments
Post a Comment