FACTNet Message Board: WHO IS CAIN'S FATHER?

<span style="float:left"><a style="text-decoration: none" title="Goto the Home Page" target="_top" href="http://www.factnet.org"><img src="/images/dboardfactnet-heartlogo-144.jpg" style="border: 0;"></a></span>

WHO IS CAIN'S FATHER?

FACTNet Message Board » Religious Cults and Sects » Doctrine / Belief / Proofs / Religious Practices » WHO IS CAIN'S FATHER?

« Previous Next »

Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post

HELP: ARE SATAN AND LUCIFER IN FACT TWO DIFFERENT NAMES FOR THE SAM... fatherofaking 15 1 10-04-07 11:33 pm

WHO IS CAIN'S FATHER? Part I ezekiel_37 400 1 1-11-07 5:31 pm

Start New Thread

Author

Message

smyrna
Senior Member
Username: smyrna

Post Number: 1474
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 66.157.43.229

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 12:30 am:

yes Ezekiel,

I was thinking along those lines. I'd say every one of us once thought that Cain was Adam's son. And a lot of other nonsense too. Like a talking snake, magic fruit trees, an ancient boat built by a guy that also had to be an ancient version of Steve Irwin going all over the globe collecting animals, flying horses pulling a chariot while the whole rig is on fire,(Elijah's parting from terra firma) and all sorts of other medieval fairy tales.

These modern theologians are open to many ideas, and I assume some will be very open to the serpent seed material. Some won't especially those educated in a denominationally biased institution. Remember Hal Lindsay and Dallas Theological?

Rapture, black helicopters, 666 tatoos, the whole bit. You won't find any of that talk at say, St. Joseph's Seminary. So I look forward to a lively discussion, without the ignorance and Biblical illiteracy that bogs down these forums.

By the way, I'll be Smyrna1084 there.

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4205
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.247.13

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 1:13 am:

smyrna, That has to be one of your most 'ignorant' statements. To say "some won't especially those educated in a denominationally biased institution" when you, zeke and I'm fairly certain other scer's were educated in the Catholic Church, is ludicrous; especially since all the people who disagree with am/sc are from many different denominations, including Catholic, and many who are non-denominational. When you convince the Catholic Church of the serpent seed doctrine, where Adam (who, by the way, couldn't get preggy, so I don't understand why any of you would even suggest satan had sex with him in order to corrupt the pure blood-line) and Eve had sex with satan because this snake (or tree according to some of you) was so desirable they couldn't resist him, please be sure to let us know. Personally, I've never met anybody who got aroused by a snake or a tree, but then I don't think the way scer's do.

ezekiel_37
Senior Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 1531
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 206.186.79.91

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 3:46 pm:

I think that by now you fully understand that we(sc and others) know the "serpent (not snake) and the Tree of knowledge of good and evil (in the midst) are references to Satan (the Devil).

So, sex with Satan the Devil producing the adversarial lineage.

Eve sinned. That much is true. 100% fully wholey seduced.

Adam sinned too, that much is true. There are different opinions as to what that sin was. I have never heard Pastor Murray teach that it was a homosexual affair, as he leaves it to you to decide.

Apples......not! Snake.......not!

I have no problem with you stating your opposition to our understanding of Doctrine, but to lie about it is wrong. So consider that please as you try to witness.

In His service
c

smyrna
Senior Member
Username: smyrna

Post Number: 1488
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 66.157.43.229

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 5:25 pm:

Godchild wrote: "Personally, I've never met anybody who got aroused by a snake or a tree, but then I don't think the way scer's do."

Another deliberate misrepresentation. No, make it a lie., Because Godchild knows that we do not believe satan was a snake or turned into a snake, as some allege. I wonder what Godchild has to say about the symbolism of Revelation?

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 590
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 8:13 pm:

an ancient boat built by a guy that also had to be an ancient version of Steve Irwin going all over the globe collecting animals,

So you think that this is symbolic too? You don't believe that Noah built a boat and put animals on board?

You know the problem I have with the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil being "sex" is that there is more to Knowledge than the Knowledge of sex and or reproduction.

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1488
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.255.80.107

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 8:36 pm:

Watchman and Smyrna,
doug,
This is the second time you alluded to "large holes in its reasoning" in reference to the Serpent Seed Doctrine. Yet, you have not declared what you think are those holes.
Have not had a lot of time lately.
I am not commenting on the bible lineages because I want to have time to look at them and come to my own conclusions but some of the large holes in reasoning I perceive are

the fact that the seed is defined in the new testament as the word of God and not a race of people

Eve giving Adam to eat and them eating of all the other trees in relation of your definition seems as weird as not understanding the meaning of talking snakes and magic fruit. What were the other trees? Why did she give to Adam?
Makes more sense to me that Adam needed Eve to be wrong to justify himself and blame God for Adam disobeying God because Adam had the command directly from God. It is something I see in all races where men use women and sex to escape from God and make women into their gods to save them from guilt. It is obvious to me what good and evil are and that taking life and death into ones own hands does not give one the power to escape death like God had given Adam and Eve before they sinned.

Also the fact that Christ was not a procreating being as Adam but a life giving spirit and the fact that sin is not from outside a person but in a person and that Christ was, if I remember the scripture correctly, casting out Satan from believers making Satan a spiritual being.

Why was Adam, in your teaching, but not Cain not referred to as Eve's seed when he came out of her body too?

Your teaching would have to explain a whole lot more than it does before I could accept it as real.

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 593
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 8:39 pm:

the fact that the seed is defined in the new testament as the word of God and not a race of people

YES!!!!!!! And satan is referred to as the father of LIES!!! There are your seeds!!! Words!!!!

True words and false words!!!!

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 594
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 8:41 pm:

Cain's "spiritual" father was satan because he believed his lies.

Adam was Cain's physical father.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1950
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Friday, January 12, 2007 - 11:40 pm:

Doug,

Genesis was written in Hebrew -- not Greek. So, when you examine the word 'seed' in Gen. 3:15 you see,

H2233
zera‛
zeh'-rah
From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

So, you have two choices -- a plant/fruit seed or posterity/child. There is no 3rd choice of followers/spiritual offspring. The word can also never be rendered as the word of God in this context.

If you look at the NT, you also see the word 'seed' referencing offspring.

om 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

The word 'seed' meaning,

G4690
sperma
sper'-mah
From G4687; somethng sown, that is, seed (including the male �sperm�); by implication offspring; specifically a remnant (figuratively as if kept over for planting): - issue, seed.

So, the problem is your confusion over the words in their original language instead of "large holes in reasoning".

If you choose plant/fruit seed, then Gen. 3:15 is speaking of an orchard growing contest between a snake and a woman [later to be named Eve because she was pregnant] that grow fruit with such large seeds that the seeds can bruise heads and heels. Those that inserted the word 'his' into the text, referring to the ownership of the 'heel', were completely nuts. If you think that make sense, then we are through.

Now, if, for the woman's half of the prophesy of Gen. 3:15, you choose the interpretation of 'seed' as offspring -- that offspring leading to Christ [the heel that would be bruised -- pierced with a spike], then you likewise have to use the same interpretation of 'seed' for the other half of the prophesy -- the serpent's seed.

Now we know that the serpent is only allegorical/symbolic for Satan [Rev. 12:9, 20:2] due to the role Satan was playing in the Garden. So, irrespective of your problem with the trees in the Garden and the wording of Gen. 3:6, we know that Satan has literal offsping from Gen. 3:14-15.

If you are not prepared to assert that the offspring of Satan resulted from Satan's sexual union with Eve, then you would need to provide scriptural support to justify Satan's union with another woman. I find no such scriptural justification for sex with any woman other than the woman in Gen. 3:15 [later to be named Eve].

smyrna
Senior Member
Username: smyrna

Post Number: 1489
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 66.157.43.229

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 2:18 am:

Grace2u quotes me: "an ancient boat built by a guy that also had to be an ancient version of Steve Irwin going all over the globe collecting animals,"

Gr2u:
"So you think that this is symbolic too? You don't believe that Noah built a boat and put animals on board?"

What I believe is that Noah only took animals with him to survive, not to repopulate the earth. God didn't need any Noah or boat to help repopulate the earth after the destruction of the age of the dinosaurs.

In addition, Noah's flood did not cover the entire planet. The OT English translators rendered the Hebrew word "eretz" and rendered it world. In our time world commonly means the entire planet. But
"eretz" means land, region, or district.

Now there is a constant debate on the flood and Noah's Ark among Christians, but the differences usually result from failing to realize there was major destruction prior to the "replenishment" which is chronicled in Genesis 1. The later account of flood of Noah was obviously a separate event.
Components of each account are often applied to them interchangeably, a reckless approach to understanding both events.

catholic_man
Intermediate Member
Username: catholic_man

Post Number: 223
Registered: 11-2006
Posted From: 72.161.119.77

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 5:06 am:

So if Satan is Cain's father then where are all the people running around with the little horns on their heads? Believe it or not, there are some people crazy enough to have plastic surgery just for that purpose. Satan may be their spiritual father not their physical father.

That was the case with Cain, too.

Again the answer to this question of the father of Cain is simple. It was Adam, physically. Satan became his spiritual father.

Scripture tells us that we cannot serve two master's. Cain made his choice.

Here's more simplicity:
Cain killed Abel because Abel wasn't able to kill Cain!

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 598
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 7:50 am:

All I can say is that God doesn't have to use man for a lot of things but he does.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1951
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 10:57 am:

So, as we can see, catholic_man believes that Gen. 3:15 speaks of the orchard growing contest between a snake and a woman. Furthermore, catholic_man believes that the text is corrupt for inserting the word "his" in reference to the ownership of the "heel" that is to be bruised.

Surely, catholic_man can tell us which fruit tree grows fruit with seeds so large that they bruise heads and heels.

Or, catholic_man can tell us whom is the spiritual seed of the woman.

The naysayers can beat around the bush all they want; but, the only rendering that makes sense and can be squared in the scriptures is literal offspring of the woman and of Satan.

terluvire
Advanced Member
Username: terluvire

Post Number: 533
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 24.115.63.15

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 11:24 am:

I just had to comment on this quote made by Catholic_man:
So if Satan is Cain's father then where are all the people running around with the little horns on their heads?

What makes you think satan has horns on his head? I read nowhere in Scripture that satan is literally described in this way. Eze.28 describes him as beautiful.

skooter942000
Intermediate Member
Username: skooter942000

Post Number: 132
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 4.243.164.102

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 1:31 pm:

[A Time Out]

From the Musical Group named (RAT)
http://www.lyricsdownload.com/ratt-round-and-round-lyrics.html

Round and round
With love we'll find a way just give it time
Round and round
What comes around goes around
I'll tell you why

- (cut)

-----------
--------------
----------------

No Name Dropping,
- But Facts are Facts

Pearls & Swine = "WASTED TIME"

If people don't want the TRUTH ,
- Like many here,

(what + Point) = ???

Rinse (repeat)
Rinse (repeat)
Rinse (repeat)
Rinse (repeat)
Rinse (repeat)

-Can we make the BLIND to SEE?

We all receive the same Penny. ( On_ pay_ day )

BTW - Where is the INCREASE here?
- With the detractors?

Seeds have been Planted
Stopped on
Watered
Bulldozed
watered again
Dug up
Replanted again.
...ETC
.....ETC (E_T_C)

Mat 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

Mat 12:27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast [them] out? therefore they shall be your judges.

Mat 12:28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.

Mat 12:29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.

Mat 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.

Mat 12:31 � Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy [against] the [Holy] Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

Mat 12:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come.

Pearls & Swine = "WASTED TIME"
Not calling CHRISTIANS (SWINE).

- These are not my words.

Doulos Don <*))><

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1489
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.125.92.21

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 1:50 pm:

Watchman
I meant Why was descendants of Adam, hence "your seed shall crush his head", in your teaching, but not Cain's descendants referred to as Eve's seed when Cain came out of her body too? Why is not Cain also referred to as "your seed" when God speaks to Eve saying "your seed will crush his head"?

And now that you mention the seed thing with Paul, I wonder, how does that relate to Eve's sperma?

I have not researched the part you just mentioned about seed though it can be interchangeable but I am in the process of looking up the scripture you quoted as referring to gentiles existing after the flood but in Genesis 10:5 Gentiles is referring to descendants of Noah and Gentiles also can refer to descendants of Israel.
I am not sure where you make a positive connection with a pre flood lineage?

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1954
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Saturday, January 13, 2007 - 2:31 pm:

doug,

Yes, Cain came from Eve and Christ from the seed of Adam would also come through Eve.

If I understand your question correctly, you are inquiring as to the two seed lines since both came through Eve.

God is speaking to the serpent [Satan] in Gen. 3:14-15. Both God and Satan know the reason why Satan impregnated the woman, for both God and Satan know the purpose of this second age in time [2Pet 3:3-7]. Satan was attempting to mess up the pure bloodline to Christ and to try to be spared from the sentence [perish] given to Satan by God for Satan's actions in the first age. If Satan was able to successfully infiltrate the bloodline to Christ, Satan could claim fathership to Christ. God's plan would have been successfully corrupted. God would have to destroy this age, and start over again, to bring forth the Messiah.

So, in Gen. 3:15, God is informing Satan that Satan's plan will not work and that the seed to come thru the woman ["her seed"] will defeat Satan's seed. God goes on to inform the woman in Gen. 3:16 that God will multiply her pregnancy, along with her sorrow.

The 'sperma' word is Greek, clearly inferring a male component. Despite what you wrote, the Greek and Hebrew are not interchangeable even though they translate to the same English word. Where did you ever learn that the Hebrew and Greek could be used that way?

Here is the Strong's for the word 'gentile',

H1471
גּי גּוי
gôy gôy
go'ee, go'-ee
Apparently from the same root as H1465 (in the sense of massing); a foreign nation; hence a Gentile; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts: - Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

It has meant varied things throughout the Bible -- non-Israelite, non-Jew, foreigners, heathens, etc.

In Gen. 10:5, it is referring to all those peoples not of the bloodline of Noah -- the 6th Day creation. Of course, Israel [sons of Jacob] are many generations in the future as of the time of Gen. 10:5.

pro610
Advanced Member
Username: pro610

Post Number: 743
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 69.204.143.12

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 9:38 am:

Smyrna,watchman,zeke,
I see you decided NOT to take up the challenge and post your heretical belief about Cain being satan,s son on Free Republic.
Don,t bother posting some silly excuse either.

There is an old saying I remember from my athletic days,it goes as follows......

"You can fool the crowds,but you can,t fool the players"

Here is another saying from Mother Angelica...

"Those who tell the Truth love you. Those who tell you what you want to hear love themselves."�Mother Angelica

I have have nothing further to say to any of you other then I will pray for you to open your eyes to the TRUTH.

Titus 3:10 Warn a heretic once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.

I have already exceeded my limit of 2 warnings!

A lesson from Sanit Paul....
For there are many insubordinate men, empty talker and deceivers�they must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for base gain what they have no right to teach... therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, instead of giving heed to Jewish myths or to commands of men who reject the truth.�Titus 1:10-13

pro610
Advanced Member
Username: pro610

Post Number: 744
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 69.204.143.12

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 9:42 am:

Correction post #743
Should read- A lesson from **Saint** Paul....

catholic_man
Intermediate Member
Username: catholic_man

Post Number: 230
Registered: 11-2006
Posted From: 67.135.19.86

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 10:41 am:

This came from one of those dreaded FW: emails that says if you don't share it you'll die.

We know better that!! Anyway, I thought I would share although not for fear of my life.

WHY GOD CREATED CHILDREN (AND IN THE PROCESS GRANDCHILDREN)

To those of us who have children in our lives,
whether they are our own,
grandchildren,
nieces,
nephews,
or students...
here is something to make you chuckle.

Whenever your children are out of control,
you can take comfort from the thought that
even God's omnipotence did not extend
to His own children.

After creating heaven and earth,
God created Adam and Eve.

And the first thing he said was
"DON'T!"

"Don't what?"
Adam replied.

"Don't eat the forbidden fruit."
God said.

"What? Forbidden fruit?
We have forbidden fruit?! Cool!
Hey Eve! We have forbidden fruit!"

"No Way!"

"Yes way!"

"Do NOT eat the fruit! "
said God.

"Why?"

"Because I am your Father and I said so!"

God replied,
wondering why He hadn't stopped
creation after making the elephants.

A few minutes later,
God saw His children having an apple break
and He was ticked!

"Didn't I tell you not to eat the fruit? "
God asked.

"Uh huh,"
Adam replied.

"Then why did you? "
said the Father.

"I don't know,"
said Eve.

"She started it! "
Adam said.

"Did not! "

"Did too! "

"DID NOT! "

Having had it with the two of them,
God's punishment was that Adam and Eve
should have children of their own.

Thus the pattern was set and it has never changed.

catholic_man
Intermediate Member
Username: catholic_man

Post Number: 231
Registered: 11-2006
Posted From: 67.135.19.86

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 10:49 am:

Part Two:
BUT THERE IS REASSURANCE IN THE ABOVE STORY!

If you have persistently and lovingly tried to give children wisdom and they haven't taken it,
don't be hard on yourself.

If God had trouble raising children,
what makes you think it would be
a piece of cake for you?

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT!

1. You spend the first two years of their life
teaching them to walk and talk. Then you spend
the next sixteen telling them to sit down and shut up.

2. Grandchildren are God's reward
for not killing your own children. Your parents were kind enough to not kill you!

3. Mothers of teens now know why
some animals eat their young.

4. Children seldom misquote you.

In fact,
they usually repeat word for word
what you shouldn't have said.

5. The main purpose of holding children's parties
is to remind yourself that there are children
more awful than your own.

6. We childproofed our homes,
but they are still getting in.

ADVICE FOR THE DAY:

Be nice to your kids.
They will choose your
nursing home one day.

AND FINALLY:

IF YOU HAVE A LOT OF TENSION
AND YOU GET A HEADACHE,
DO WHAT IT SAYS
ON THE ASPIRIN BOTTLE:

"TAKE TWO ASPIRIN"
AND "KEEP AWAY FROM CHILDREN"!!!!!

Quick,
send this on to ten people
within the next five minutes.

Nothing will happen if you don't,
but if you do,
ten people will be laughing!!

ezekiel_37
Senior Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 1534
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 206.186.79.91

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 3:48 pm:

Pro...I have less than an hour on line during weekdays...for now.

I simply don't have the time....right now.

But I will attempt to go there in the future when I have more time....and as smyrna has stated...he is game....so am I but lack the physical time....for now!

Peace in Christ
c

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1491
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.251.46.106

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 9:35 pm:

God is speaking to the serpent [Satan] in Gen. 3:14-15. Both God and Satan know the reason why Satan impregnated the woman, for both God and Satan know the purpose of this second age in time [2Pet 3:3-7]. Satan was attempting to mess up the pure bloodline to Christ and to try to be spared from the sentence [perish] given to Satan by God for Satan's actions in the first age. If Satan was able to successfully infiltrate the bloodline to Christ, Satan could claim fathership to Christ. God's plan would have been successfully corrupted. God would have to destroy this age, and start over again, to bring forth the Messiah.

So, in Gen. 3:15, God is informing Satan that Satan's plan will not work and that the seed to come thru the woman ["her seed"] will defeat Satan's seed. God goes on to inform the woman in Gen. 3:16 that God will multiply her pregnancy, along with her sorrow.
That seems possible

The 'sperma' word is Greek, clearly inferring a male component. Despite what you wrote, the Greek and Hebrew are not interchangeable even though they translate to the same English word. Where did you ever learn that the Hebrew and Greek could be used that way?
I know Greek and Hebrew are not interchangeable. One of us, probably me, must have misunderstood something the other said if you think I said that.

Here is the Strong's for the word 'gentile',
H1471
גּי גּוי
gôy gôy
go'ee, go'-ee
Apparently from the same root as H1465 (in the sense of massing); a foreign nation; hence a Gentile; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts: - Gentile, heathen, nation, people.
It has meant varied things throughout the Bible -- non-Israelite, non-Jew, foreigners, heathens, etc.
You left out Israelite
Isiah 1:4;9:2; 26:2;49:7.
Genesis 35:11;12:2
Psalm33:12
The same word also is clearly used referring to Israel.

In Gen. 10:5, it is referring to all those peoples not of the bloodline of Noah -- the 6th Day creation. Of course, Israel [sons of Jacob] are many generations in the future as of the time of Gen. 10:5.

Genesis 12:1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
Gen 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation 01471, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

Gen 35:10 And God said unto him, Thy name [is] Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel.
Gen 35:11 And God said unto him, I [am] God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation 01471 and a company of nations 01471 shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;
etc etc

And this, before I started looking closely at it, seemed to be one of your stronger points earlier on.

How do you explain eating of the tree of life? What family is that that Adam and Eve were kept out of Eden so they could not, in your terminology, have sex with "and live forever?

smyrna
Senior Member
Username: smyrna

Post Number: 1553
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 66.157.43.229

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 10:28 pm:

Doug,

It would be easier on all of us if you study the Shepherd's Chapel threads regarding the Serpent's Seed. Most, if not all of your questions have been addressed there.

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1493
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.251.46.106

Posted on Monday, January 15, 2007 - 11:21 pm:

smyrna
I'm not planning to dig through and study hundreds of threads just to find an answer to my present question How do you explain eating of the tree of life? What family is that that Adam and Eve were kept out of Eden so they could not, in your terminology, have sex with "and live forever?. If you don't want to answer them than don't. Certain parts of your doctrine I understand but it is not conclusive to me.

The part about the gentiles seemed to be a strong point about there being other nations apart from Noah after the flood but when I looked at the word for gentile it is used referring to Israel a number of times. Watchman failed to mention it. That's just another weakness in the doctrine.

I believe that Jesus is the tree of life and we must eat his flesh and drink his blood which is what the wine and bread in the passover supper symbolize. I don't believe that this is a sexual thing but actually about an end to procreating, hence the last Adam. When the believers, the bride of Christ, are at the marriage supper, they will have eternal life and not need to replace their undying bodies with new ones.

The angel of death that passes over at the passover supper is the cherubim that guards Eden where the tree of life is partaken of. I don't see anything sexual about that. Do you?

skooter942000
Intermediate Member
Username: skooter942000

Post Number: 141
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 4.243.170.120

Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 3:20 pm:

satan is the DEATH-ANGEL.

He is the Angel of death.

= Apollyon/Abaddon

Hbr 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are
partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself
likewise took part of the same; that through
death he might destroy him that had the power
of death, that is, the devil;

Hbr 2:15 And deliver them who through fear
of death were all their lifetime subject to
bondage.

The Cherubim Guard the mercy seat,
- (Where GOD Dwells).

- Does EDEN exist on Earth today?

- Where "ALMIGHTY GOD" is ,
- (so are "HIS PROTECTORS").

Don <*))><

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1962
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 7:30 pm:

Hi doug,

I'll try to answer your questions.

First, you wrote,

You left out Israelite
Isiah 1:4;9:2; 26:2;49:7.
Genesis 35:11;12:2
Psalm33:12
The same word also is clearly used referring to Israel.

The word 'Gentile(s)' is not the rendering in any of these verses. So, when is it rendered 'Gentile' and when is it rendered 'nation'? If the context is outside of that which is considered the family at the time, it is rendered as 'Gentile'. If it is considered within the family, the word 'nation' is rendered.

Hence, in Gen. 10:5, all that remained of the family bloodline from Adam is Noah and his family. The 6th day creation would not be of Adam's pure bloodline, so their nations/lands are referred to as "Gentile".

With respect to "eating of the tree of life", "eating" simply means 'partaking thereof'.

H398

'âkal
aw-kal'
A primitive root; to eat (literally or figuratively): - X at all, burn up, consume, devour (-er, up), dine, eat (-er, up), feed (with), food, X freely, X in . . . wise (-deed, plenty), (lay) meat, X quite.

Of course, Christ, the tree of life, would not have sex with Eve. Christ knows the plan of God.

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1495
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 72.68.8.186

Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 9:34 pm:

skooter942000
- Does EDEN exist on Earth today?

Christ is the tree of life. The Cherubims, with swords that go every way like a flame, pass over when they see the blood of the lamb on the doorpost.
See the post on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 - 10:46 pm: under WHO IS CAIN'S FATHER? Part I

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1496
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 72.68.8.186

Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 9:58 pm:

watchman_2
So why is eating of the tree of life different than eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and how does the whole thing tie in with christ? They were put out of Eden so they wouldn't partake of Christ and live forever?
So the tree of life would have no physical fruit?
Interesting to contemplate.

It has meant varied things throughout the Bible -- non-Israelite, non-Jew, foreigners, heathens, etc. and Israelite.

The word 'Gentile(s)' is not the rendering in any of these verses. So, when is it rendered 'Gentile' and when is it rendered 'nation'? Rendered by who? I still am looking at the verses and some people may render them "gentile" and others "nations" but it's the same word in the Hebrew so the rendering may be the translators opinion.

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1497
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 72.68.8.186

Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 10:04 pm:

PS
In case you haven't noticed, I don't question you to trip you up or trap you but I delight in searching out matters and scrubbing and scrubbing until I see if there is a clean baby in the bath water or just dirt and in the past I have heard some interesting things from you so I'm scrubbing away if you don't mind, but I tell you if I think you're off. Does my questions stretch your thinking at all or are they just common and or annoying?

(Message edited by doug on January 16, 2007)

arron
Senior Member
Username: arron

Post Number: 3160
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.169.14.8

Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 10:04 pm:

let them explian if the tree was somebody (meaning JESUS CHRIST or the devil) why they grew out of the ground. now when i ask they say i have already been told but i have not for they do not answer the question.

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1499
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 72.68.8.186

Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 10:28 pm:

Arron
Good question!
I find when I have a question in my mind it creates a vacuum and nature abhors a vacuum so eventually I find an answer!

6086 `ets ates from 6095; a tree (from its firmness); hence, wood (plural sticks):--+ carpenter, gallows, helve, + pine, plank, staff, stalk, stick, stock, timber, tree, wood.
6095 `atsah aw-tsaw' a primitive root; properly, to fasten (or make firm), i.e. to close (the eyes):--shut.
Note: this "Tree" has nothing to do with family lineage.

arron
Senior Member
Username: arron

Post Number: 3164
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.169.14.8

Posted on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - 10:56 am:

amen

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1963
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - 1:18 pm:

doug,

I think that I have only once taken offense to a post from you. And, it had nothing to do with your questions, but the inferences and conclusions that you made therein your post.

A person, whom posts a theological position, should be able to support that position and answer related questions. I take no offense to an intelligent discussion. Furthermore, I take no offense if one does not agree with me. What you or I may consider a "clean baby" can be different than the next person.

Your question regarding the Gentiles/nations is on point. I have often argued that there are multiple meanings of certain Hebrew and Greek words and that the KJV rendering is in error.

In this case, the same Hebrew word is rendered Gentile in some cases and Nation in other cases. I believe the rendering is defined by the context of the people addressed as within or out of the bloodline. I am not aware if there are errant renderings in the KJV for this word.

Therefore, the Israelites are not Gentiles as used in the scriptures that you posted. However, later, it is apparent that the term Gentile was also used to refer to a non-Jew. I do not agree with that interpretation because it infers that the Abrahamic covenant somehow is with the Jews, which it is not. By labeling the remaining 11 tribes as Gentiles, the impression is given that these tribes are not of Israel.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1964
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - 1:26 pm:

doug,

arron has been shown how the word 'tree' has been documented throughout the word of God to also be symbolic of God, Christ, and Satan.

He posts here out of his own wickedness, for he has been proven wrong many times regarding this subject and, instead, has chosen to do the ostrich and stick his head in the sand in fear of hearing or seeing Truth. He does not want Truth to get in the way of his unbiblical beliefs.

You certainly can do your own research on the subject and can confirm for yourself the symbolic use of the word 'tree'. Perhaps, arron can inform you which tree has any knowledge, let alone knowledge of good and evil. Which tree can give me life? Which tree grows fruit with seeds so large that the seeds bruise heads and heels?

A wise person would know that no such fruit trees exist.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1965
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - 1:32 pm:

P.S.

The scriptures clearly distinguish between the various "trees".

Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The trees for eating are defined to come out of the ground. The scripture does not state that the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil came out of the ground -- only that these trees were also there.

pro610
Advanced Member
Username: pro610

Post Number: 745
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 69.204.143.12

Posted on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - 2:14 pm:

Doug,
Since you,re doing research ,here is good article from Dr.Scott Hahn that is in line with historical Christianity and typology of Scripture
http://www.catholic-pages.com/bvm/hahn.asp

Excerpt:
"So the Lord said to the serpent, 'Because you have done this cursed you above all the livestock, etc." But here we look at verse 15, "And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed. He will crush your head and you will strike his heel."

Now some other translations render, "She will crush your head." And so we have statues of our Lady crushing the head of the serpent. That's an interesting but kind of tangential issue for us right now. At any rate, we see here the woman. "I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed." Now you don't have to be a scientist to wonder what they're talking about here. The serpent's seed, okay. But her seed? The Greek Old Testament translates this spermatos, that's the term for seed. Now so far, so good, but wait a second. What is it doing in connection with the woman? The woman's seed? Nowhere else in the Old Testament do you ever come across an expression like that. It's always the man's seed, the husband's seed, the father's seed. This is weird. The woman's seed? Yeah, God's going to elevate that woman and give to her in some unique sense perhaps a seed through which the serpent's head will be crushed. Keep that in the back of your mind because that is going to be crucial. "

I wish you a Blessed day!

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1972
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - 5:39 pm:

The Greek OT is a translation of the Hebrew manuscripts. The word 'seed' in the Greek differs with the word 'seed' in the Hebrew. To understand Gen. 3:15 properly, the Greek is not the way to go. The Hebrew definition, as I have posted many times, tells us that the 'seed' in Gen. 3:15 means 'posterity'.

pro610
Advanced Member
Username: pro610

Post Number: 746
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 69.204.143.12

Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 - 10:48 am:

Doug ,
There are many problems with using Strong,s for Hebrew definitions.Many of their definitions do not fall into line with Ancient Hebrew.
Do some research on Strong,s and Ancient Hebrew and you find a huge amount of misrepresentations of words.
There is still plenty of research being done on ancient texts and Hebrew,as this report illustrates
http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/JHS/Articles/article_36.htm
These people who preach this serpent seed stuff are following Ancient Babylonian Mysticism .
You will find many similarities to this serpent seed cain line idea in Gnostic writings.

Got to run!

I wish you a Blessed day!

obadiah
Member
Username: obadiah

Post Number: 75
Registered: 12-2006
Posted From: 70.169.190.223

Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 - 1:00 pm:

Cain IS listed in Adam's geneology, " v'ha-adam ya-da eth cha-va ish-to va-ta-har va-te-led eth qa-yin..." " And the ADAM knew
(had intercourse,sex)with Chava(Life-giver) his wife and she conceived and gave birth to Qayin..." Nothing could be more clear in the Bible! CAIN IS THE FLESH AND BLOOD SON OF ADAM!!!
There can be no other possible interpretation.

skooter942000
Intermediate Member
Username: skooter942000

Post Number: 150
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 4.243.173.53

Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 - 1:47 pm:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Gen/Gen005.html#top

ezekiel_37
Senior Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 1549
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 206.186.79.91

Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 - 4:10 pm:

simple and strait from the Word, Skooter.

Cain is NOT in Adam's lineage.
He has his own line.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Gen/Gen004.html

Peace in Christ
c

skooter942000
Intermediate Member
Username: skooter942000

Post Number: 163
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 4.243.221.85

Posted on Saturday, January 20, 2007 - 1:21 pm:

Just to NOTE:
- [for the accusers out there]

Kenites can find Salvation too, (Their Choice).

- JOHN 3:16 is CLEAR!!!

"ETERNAL LIFE" (Is a choice), - not a RIGHT.

- It's GOD'S WAY,
- or the Highway!!!

- Choose Wisely

Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Jhn 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4833
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.137.88

Posted on Saturday, January 20, 2007 - 6:41 pm:

Doesn't matter. There are no such people as Kenites. The original tribe was assimilated into the Hebrews. There are no spawns of satan. satan did not have sex with Eve. Cain is the son of Adam.

There are no spawns of satan. But there are the SC'ers who are the PAWNS OF satan!

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 639
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Saturday, January 20, 2007 - 6:50 pm:

Please read "The Rest of the Story" at this link:

http://www.missiontoisrael.org/didshe-pt1.php

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 640
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Saturday, January 20, 2007 - 7:01 pm:

A woman dosn't have "seed", the woman has an egg that the seed of man fertilizes. This is the PROOF that God is speaking of spiritual not physical "seed". Actually Gen:3:15 is the first prophecy of the Coming of JESUS, The Messiah.

Anyone want to elaborate on the comment above?

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 1985
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Saturday, January 20, 2007 - 11:28 pm:

seed = offspring

H2233
zera‛
zeh'-rah
From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

Can never mean spiritual followers.

For those bibilically illiterists, Kenites exist

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

Cain is not in the lineage of Adam [See Gen. 5]. Cain has his own lineage [See Gen. 4:17-24].

These are the facts -- and there is no dispute!

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 657
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Sunday, January 21, 2007 - 12:56 am:

Watchman you act like the Grinch with your style of writing!

Be nice to me because I am a nice person!!!!

OK?

How is this a physical seed in the below context?

1Pe 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
1Pe 1:21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.
1Pe 1:22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:
1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.
1Pe 1:24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth forever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

daikon
Intermediate Member
Username: daikon

Post Number: 175
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 207.200.116.135

Posted on Sunday, January 21, 2007 - 9:07 pm:

Well,
I don't normally find agreement with watchman2 -- let's say, our paths don't intersect --

However, I do agree that "seed" does logically translate to offspring/posterity in the context of the quoted scriptures--

and Kenites do exist:

ie - Judges 5:24 (regarding the woman who "saved the day" in the Song of Deborah) -- Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite.

selah

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4847
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.137.88

Posted on Sunday, January 21, 2007 - 9:37 pm:

brainedwashedman: "Cain is not in the lineage of Adam [See Gen. 5]. Cain has his own lineage [See Gen. 4:17-24]."

These are the facts -- and there is no dispute!"

There is a WORLD of dispute starting with:

KJV Genesis 4:1

Genesis 4
1"And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD."

The Bible is not yours to twist and pervert to promote the racist hatred you have in your black heart.

The Bible clearly says that ADAM is Cain's father.

There are no kenites today. They were assimilated thousands of years ago. The Jews are not the spawn of satan. Adam and Eve are the original parents of ALL races. White, black and yellow.

These are the facts jack! There IS NO DISPUTE dupe!

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1500
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.127.215.33

Posted on Sunday, January 21, 2007 - 9:50 pm:

Watchman
Therefore, the Israelites are not Gentiles as used in the scriptures that you posted. However, later, it is apparent that the term Gentile was also used to refer to a non-Jew. I do not agree with that interpretation because it infers that the Abrahamic covenant somehow is with the Jews, which it is not. By labeling the remaining 11 tribes as Gentiles, the impression is given that these tribes are not of Israel.
I wasn't meaning that because the word "nation" is used they are gentiles. What do you mean by "Jews" here? Tribe of Judah? Children of Israel?

I'm not being very thorough tonight as I have many other projects on my mind now.

Franklin
There are no such people as Kenites. The original tribe was assimilated into the Hebrews.
Could you show me this history in the bible or wherever it is from?

Pro 610
Although the Rabbis once in awhile have interesting things to say I was never interested in Rabbinical Hebrew. I am not very learned so I often use the easiest to use texts which are Strong�s but I also look at the context of how a word is used in many places and how it fits into the scripture as a whole.

Any thing you have to share with me about Hebrew I appreciate. I so far have learned to read it phonetically when vowels are in it but can only translate a few words.

When I go to God I don't always hear the answers he gives me but accept His sovereignty on whether or not He saves me. I think it is interesting and questionable as to whether or not the flood was local and where did Cain find a wife? Did others exist? Who are Kenites ... But I don't know if it matters. I hope God will save me but if it is a blood line thing and I am not in it I still want to serve Him until He destroys me.

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4333
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.251.9

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 3:02 am:

Don't you all recognise trentwoodard, aka john cody, john cody parker, sashamirage, eli and other aliases?

daikon
Intermediate Member
Username: daikon

Post Number: 175
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 207.200.116.135

johncody (johncody)
Junior Member
Username: johncody

Post Number: 46
Registered: 2-2005
Posted From: 207.200.116.135
Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 1:22 pm:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems there was a few but they ran off seeing they got overpowered by too many Shepherds Chapel students in one place,,,, they desided to blow-up the site,,, , Go nuclear (lol)

As there are so few S.C. students on the net They are used to ganging-up on loners but here they got in over their heads (lol)

Next stop CARM

Just kidding, I have been banned for life from Rapture Ready and CARM.
-----------------end
I've had his list of names and ip's since I first read some of his neo-nazi garbage, including daikon. I should have been reading here sooner. You guys are in for a "devilish" ride.
-Vivian Hadden

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4334
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.251.9

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 3:07 am:

I expect to get some "web hate" thrown my way, but I'm used to it from the likes of him and the scers. If you go to the am/sc threads, you'll see trentwoodard became a good buddy with them; with one exception. I believe that was watchman.
But he was using john cody or john c parker or john parker there. Whatever, he's so easy to recognise.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4849
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.137.88

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 5:25 am:

I see what you mean gc.

johncody (johncody)
Junior Member
Username: johncody

Post Number: 31
Registered: 2-2005
Posted From: 207.200.116.135
Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 8:06 pm:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The great flood of Noahs day occured in 2340 BC

The last global high stand of water occured hundreds of millions of years ago

The Great flood occured smack in the middle of the Bronze Age, the great pyramid was never under water

The scribe translaters have the world deceived, as they are indeed sons of Cain.

KENITES are the Sons of Cain

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, [and] Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

Those of the House of Rachab ARE the Kenite scribes

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 667
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 6:41 am:

Watchman,

Still waiting on the answer to my question about how you interpret seed in 1 Peter 1?

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 668
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 7:11 am:

And the really strange thing is that I'm not even saying that the seed of the woman isn't offspring. I just want to get you out of this box that says it has to be and cannot be anything else. Can seed refer to anything else? Can seed refer to a little thing you plant in the ground? Can seed refer to something you plant by faith?

What I think? The woman's seed refers to Christ. I also think that even though there is a very physical reality probably presented in Genesis that there is also a layer that is prophetic and really that layer is the most important part but everyone gets so stuck in the physical reality. I'm an abstract thinker so I don't quite see it that way. Like C.S. Lewis says: Further in and further up. (Which is probably why I love Kandinsky - remember Doug?)

Eve is a type. She might indeed typify Mary and her seed of faith of believing what the angel spoke to her perhaps? She might indeed typify Israel and the Messiah being the offspring of Israel.

Cain likewise is a type. A type of antichrist.

But let me state that if Cain was the physical seed of satan then for balance where is the physical seed of God? If Abel is Adam's child and we all agree that he is then would there be an imbalance to this "twin" conception theory? One being the good twin and the other being the bad twin?

Or if you want to really get abstract (and I'm not sure I even buy this even myself) - what you could be indicating is that Adam was Christ or God and not a "type"? That Adam willingly ate of the forbidden fruit to be with his wife. Well, that's why I see this in more of a spiritual sense. If Eve represents a "type" of the Church and she fell to earth so to speak could it be that Adam is a "type" of Christ that partakes of death to be with her?

Now many preachers teach this or something similar. They probably don't present it as abstractly as the above but I'm just trying to work through all the points. What I really am doing is just proposing questions.

pro610
Advanced Member
Username: pro610

Post Number: 748
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 69.204.143.12

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 9:23 am:

Doug,
Quote
""I hope God will save me but if it is a blood line thing and I am not in it I still want to serve Him until He destroys me.""

Doug,
Christ died for ALL, and ALL MEANS ALL!
That means ALL Bloodlines are covered under the New Covenant.
The devil is a fallen angel,thus can not reproduce or have a bloodline.

Dear Brother,don,t let these Serpent Seed pushers get inside your head.
They ignore or don,t understand historical Christianity and Scriptural typology

All of the Early Church Father,s and Saints understood Typology and Covenants.
This was understood clearly for first 1500 years of Christianity up until the reformation.
We are living in a time of mass confusion due to the reformation,thus typology,historical Christianity has been gradually getting lost .
This is the reason we have too many Fundamentalists.
The New Covenant is promised in the Old, and the Old is fulfilled in the New. Typology is the principle by which we see this most clearly . Typology shows us that passing from the Old to the New is more than just turning the page from Malachi to Matthew. Typology shows us how Jesus' coming, in the fullness of time.
Typology ALWAYS overules language interpretations.
The Early Father,s ,some who were direct Disciples of the Apostle,s understood this.

Here are some links for you

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03776b.htm

http://www.salvationhistory.com/online/Beginner/WalkGen.cfm

I will keep you in my Prayers.
I wish you a Blessed day!

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4338
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.251.152

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 12:02 pm:

grace2u, mormonism puts forth this abstract idea, re:
Or if you want to really get abstract (and I'm not sure I even buy this even myself) - what you could be indicating is that Adam was Christ or God and not a "type"? That Adam willingly ate of the forbidden fruit to be with his wife. Well, that's why I see this in more of a spiritual sense. If Eve represents a "type" of the Church and she fell to earth so to speak could it be that Adam is a "type" of Christ that partakes of death to be with her?

Now many preachers teach this or something similar. They probably don't present it as abstractly as the above but I'm just trying to work through all the points. What I really am doing is just proposing questions.
-----------
and this is what it leads to:
That Jesus was our literal brother in a spirit world before we came to earth, there was a plan there for Adam to come and bring sin into the world so that we could then come down and make our choice for or against God. Judas also agreed to do his part (the deception) as another brother of Jesus. In the end, if we do all the "works" required, we will become gods just like Jesus did.

am/sc and the mormon prophet joe smith used the Book of Enoch and others. If you know what sc teaches, they believe those who don't accept their false doctrines now will do so "by works, not faith" during the millenium. And scer's will be your teachers, because they are God's elect, chosen before they came to earth. They will be competing with the mormons, who believe they will be teaching you during the millenium. That should give you a clue. It kind of leaves Jesus out of the mix. Which makes it heresy and blasphemy.

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4339
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.251.152

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 12:10 pm:

Now, here's the interesting part. They know of each other's teachings, yet they do not join together. Why? Because each of them wants to be "right", which means their religion is about "self" and not Jesus Christ.

They will totally deny that the other is "the true church". Well, in that way, both of them are right. They can see the fallicy of the other, but not in themselves.

skooter942000
Intermediate Member
Username: skooter942000

Post Number: 170
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 4.243.167.163

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 5:04 pm:

From franklin

Doesn't matter. There are no such people as Kenites. The original tribe was assimilated into the Hebrews. There are no spawns of satan. satan did not have sex with Eve. Cain is the son of Adam.

--------8<--cut---------------

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes
which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the
Shimeathites, [and] Suchathites. These [are]
the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father
of the house of Rechab.

- SEE THE NETHINIMS

(CAIN)
7014 Qayin kah'-yin the same as 7013
(with a play upon the affinity to 7069);
Kajin, the name of the first child, also
of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe:
--Cain, Kenite(-s).

(KENITE)
7017 Qeyniy kay-nee' or Qiyniy (1 Chron. 2:55)
{kee-nee'};
=====> patronymic from 7014; <=======
a Kenite or member
of the tribe of Kajin:--Kenite.

patronymic means what?

patronymic

noun

1. A name derived from one's father's or other
male ancestor's name, usually with a suffix or prefix,
as in Donaldson or Macdonald, or the Russian Davidovich
or Davidovna. Compare matronymic.

Etymology: 17c: from Greek pater father + onyma name.

[END]

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4351
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.250.55

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 6:17 pm:

am/sc and the mormon prophet joe smith used the

Book of Enoch and others. If you know what sc

teaches, they believe those who don't accept

their false doctrines now will do so "by works,

not faith" during the millenium. And scer's will

be your teachers, because they are God's elect,

chosen before they came to earth. They will be

competing with the mormons, who believe they

will be teaching you during the millenium. That

should give you a clue. It kind of leaves Jesus

out of the mix. Which makes it heresy and

blasphemy.

Now, here's the interesting part. They know of

each other's teachings, yet they do not join

together. Why? Because each of them wants to

be "right", which means their religion is

about "self" and not Jesus Christ.

They will totally deny that the other is "the

true church". Well, in that way, both of them

are right. They can see the fallicy of the

other, but not in themselves.

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 670
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 7:17 pm:

Well - I certainly disagree with Mormonism. I understand that you just can't use abstract thinking all the time. You cannot. I strive to learn when you can. So please don't assume that I am. It's just my base way of thinking I believe. I know the problems it can cause. It generally hasn't but one can totally miss reality if they are not careful. Still there is the symbology, types, etc.

daikon
Intermediate Member
Username: daikon

Post Number: 176
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 207.200.116.135

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 7:51 pm:

godchild...

I'm not sure what you were getting at in your post # 4333...

Were you saying I am someone who also posts as trentwoodward or john cody?

And I have some kind of nazi leanings?

No to both points.

sbcglobal [or at&t] in the large So. Cal. area where I live supports a lot of computers -- perhaps these posters live in the area.

The nazi part doesn't even make sense...?

I agreed with some literal ("just the facts, ma'am") points from watchman2, is that why you all of a sudden are looking for fault in me?

I'm curious. That's all.

peace

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1502
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.127.221.219

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 10:15 pm:

Which is probably why I love Kandinsky - remember Doug?) Grace - Refresh me please?

Grace 2 U and God's Child,
I believe if Adam had not eaten the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he would have been like Christ to Eve and would have died for her sin but it didn't happen that way perhaps because like men pressure women today there was a pressure from Adam for Eve to eat so he could use her as an excuse for his pride. All became guilty through one man's sin, Adam's and not through Eve's.

Watchman,
Did you have it out with Trent Woodard? I'd like to see the debate if so.

doug
Senior Member
Username: doug

Post Number: 1504
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.255.80.76

Posted on Monday, January 22, 2007 - 10:33 pm:

Pro 610

Thank you for you prayers and for the article which I think bears copying here.
I do not use historical christianity to base my beliefs on though I do like to understand the bible by learning from the early fathers in the Church till around 300. I do realize the difficulty in translations and understanding the meaning of the bible and that there are differences in types of hebrew like Rabbinical vs biblical etc and find the study interesting. The catholics have a wealth of knowledge. I'd like to continue a discussion on these things not directly related to this topic but on a different thread.
Thanks

Cinites
(A.V. Kenites).

A tribe or family often mentioned in the Old Testament, personified as Qayin from which the nomen gentilicium Qeni is derived. In spite of several attempts at a solution, the origin both of the name and of the tribe is still obscure. Hobab the relative (brother-in-law?) of Moses was a Cinite (Judges, i, 16, iv, 11; as Hobab is also called a Madianite (Numbers 10:29), it follows that the Cinites belonged to that nation. Judging from appearances, the Cinites were true worshippers of Yahweh. Some scholars, on the strength of Ex., xviii, go even so far as to assert that it was from them that the Israelites received a great portion of their monotheistic theology; the passage, however, deals directly and only with social organization. At any rate, the Rechabites, a clan of the Cinites [I Par. (A. V. I Chron.) ii, 55] were even ascetics and insisted on retaining the nomadic habits of the followers of Yahweh (Jeremiah 35), Though calamities were foretold for the Cinites by Balaam (Numbers 24:21 sqq.), they are always represented as being on friendly terms with the Israelites. Owing probably to their alliance with Moses and also to the bonds of a common religion, they befriended the Israelites during their wanderings in the desert [Num., x, 29-32, 1 K. (A.V. I Sam.) xv, 6] and joined them in their march on Chanaan (Judges, 1, 16). There is no intimation that there ever was any enmity between the two nations (cf. 1 Samuel 27:10, 30:29). The Cinites dwelt south of Palestine with the Amalecites, as is evident from Num., xxiv, 21 sqq., I K., xv, 6, and probably from Judges, i, 16 if, instead of the Massoretic version, we use an alternate Hebrew reading -- a reading which is supported by several Greek manuscripts and by the Sahidic Coptic Version (cf. Ciasca, Fragm. Copto-Sahidica). One clan of the Cinites left the tribe and settled in the north under Haber, at the time of Barac and Debbera (Judges 4:11); Jahel, who slew Sisara, was the wife of Haber the Cinite (ibid., iv, 17 sqq., v, 24 sqq.). From the facts that we find the Cinites south and north, and that in Aramaic the root from which Qayin is derived implies the idea of a smith, Sayce (in Hastings, Dict. Bib., s.v. Kenites) draws the conclusion that the Cinites were a wandering guild of smiths. This view has against it the obvious meaning of the texts (see especially Genesis 15:19). Apparently the Cinites shared in the Babylonian Exile and in the Restoration, but they do not appear any more as a distinct tribe and very likely were assimilated with the Jews.

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 672
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 5:54 am:

Doug,

Hillbilly

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2002
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 5:33 pm:

Doug,

You wrote,

Watchman,
Did you have it out with Trent Woodard? I'd like to see the debate if so.

I am sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.

ezekiel_37
Senior Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 1560
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 206.186.79.91

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 5:39 pm:

I've read those comments before Doud (about the kenites), and disagree.

Moses's kenite link was by area and not lineage.
His relative lived among them and is called a kenite.

Much like an african descended people born and bread in the states, being called Americans.

Race....and ....surriundings.

Moses bloodline is traceable as his families is.
Moses and his family were not kenites but lived among them. His family was Hebrew...from Seth, not from Cain.

Doug...salvation is not based on lineage.
A jew or a arab or an american does not have an "in" while others don't.

You know this.

Now, understanding who ISRAEL is in prophecy can clear up a lot of confusion.

Judah is the present recognized nation of Israel, although they are the Jews (Judah)in prophecy.

Israel is Jacob's scattered descendants, and scattered to the ends of the earth. They are not all Jews....nor the Israel that is presently recognized on a map.

Israel is us....the free nations of the world...
and...
Israel is europe for better and worse.

When people will read the end time events with this in mind, scripture opens up and means a lot more than what most think.

God is speaking to YOU!

Peace in Christ
c

ezekiel_37
Senior Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 1563
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 206.186.79.91

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 5:53 pm:

cordell
Senior Member
Username: cordell

Post Number: 1410
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 66.69.35.7

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 5:59 pm:

Here's Israel completed and expanded (NOT replaced):

Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called the uncircumcision by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone...

Here's why:

For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

and this is fulfilled now, in Christ:

Arise, shine, for your light has come,and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. For behold, darkness shall cover the earth,and thick darkness the peoples; but the Lord will arise upon you,and his glory will be seen upon you. And nations [gentiles] shall come to your light,and kings to the brightness of your rising. Lift up your eyes all around, and see; they all gather together, they come to you; your sons shall come from afar,and your daughters shall be carried on the hip.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2003
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 6:21 pm:

grace2u,

I apologize for not getting back to you sooner.

Before I address your I Peter question, the issue in Gen. 3:15 is resolved on its own. As I pointed out, the word 'seed' as used in the Hebrew scriptures, never means spiritual seed. Your implication that it does is adding to the scriptures and God speaks out against this accordingly:

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Now, Gen. 3:15 is surely prophetic and your addition to this scripture shall surely warrant onto you the plagues that are in the Bible. I thought that you should be aware of the results of your actions.

Now, assuming arguendo that the word 'seed' in Gen. 3:15 is, indeed, 'spirtual' seed as it refers to the serpent [Gen. 3:14], then you would have to, in all genuineness, admit that the woman [later to be named Eve] must also have 'spiritual' seed. This would make you a defacto Eve worshipper instead of a Christian.

What you are attempting to portray is that, within the very same scripture, it is appropriate to claim that the word 'seed' is 'spiritual' in nature relative to the serpent, but figuratively offspring with respect to the woman. That inconsistency in your logic is fatal to your analysis.

Hence, irrespective of 1 Peter, the context of Gen. 3:15 can be nothing other than offspring of Satan and offspring of the woman.

It does not take a rocket scientist to figure this out. Reading on in Gen. 3:16, God is speaking of pregnancy/conception and multiplying thereof. Surely, one cannot maintain a consistent context if one speaks of 'spiritual' seed in verse 15 and then offspring in verse 16.

I have taken considerable high-level mathematics in my studies to be an engineer [Tyco train engineer as godchild affectionately refers to]. To multiply any number times 0 always results in 0. For God then to mulitply the woman's conception [Gen. 3:16] beyond 0, she would already have to be pregnant to begin with.

Of course, after hearing from God that the woman was already pregnant, Adam gave the woman the name Eve, for she was [denoting existing condition]the mother of all living. See Gen. 3:20

So, irrespective of 1 Peter, the scriptures plainly indicate that the woman is pregnant as of Gen. 3:15.

We also know that Adam did not first know his wife until Gen. 4:1, which came after they were kicked out of the Garden and after the woman was named.

Hence, the scriptures clearly inform us that someone, other than Adam, impregnated the woman in Gen. 3:15. Of course, no mystery here. Gen. 3:14 informs us that the serpent did it.

There really is no argument at all here. Satan was Cain's father.

cordell
Senior Member
Username: cordell

Post Number: 1411
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 66.69.35.7

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 6:40 pm:

That logic is a good example of why Clarence Larkin (an architectural draftsman) was such a lousy theologian. The Hebrews do not believe that Cain was the Son of Satan in the physical sense and do not hold that Eve was pregnant as of Gen.3:15 and when Jesus says in the New Testament to the Pharisees "you are of your father the devil" he does not intend that they are actually the literal spawn of Satan or Cain, as he says "he was a murderer from the beginning". We would have to stretch it quite far for that scripture to mean that Jesus meant that these folks were literally descended from Cain any more than a Christian literally has Abraham's blood running in his veins or was ever actually in his loins. Satan was and is a fallen angel. Angels do not produce literal offspring (your predictable interpretation of Gen. 6 notwithstanding).

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4366
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.249.120

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 7:10 pm:

please see the Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon. You will find that seed has MANY definitions in Hebrew. This should also clear up any question about whether Noah was spared because he was righteous, or as some say, he had a pure pedigree.

Seed: Hebrew definition= moral, quality of righteousness, to trail (as seed in growing), figuratively; fishing up, securing, draw, drag along and others.

Clearly, those who are drawn along by satan's lies can be called satan's 'seed'. Those who have low morals can be called satan's 'seed', just as though who are not righteous can be. Just as clearly, Eve's seed can be called those who follow God, those who are moral and righteous.

It is only through Christ that any of us are righteous in the sight of God. The Bible says, "There is none righteous (not of "unpure lineage or blood"); no, not one." This doesn't mean we are all the literal children of satan. It means we were all born into sin. Because of Adam's transgression (Romans 5:12 tells us through one man [not woman]sin entered the world. The next goes on to describe this man as Adam, not Eve, (1 Cor.15:22 For as in ADAM all die [not Eve], even so in Christ shall all be made alive). "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." Not, some were elect as spirits before they came to earth, others have that chance to accept God in this earth life, then those who haven't get the chance in the millenium. That is absurd. You would have to believe that Jesus is Adam. Do you believe this?

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 674
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 8:12 pm:

I have not added to the Bible. Let's see what the Bible says about the offspring of God:

Joh 3:3-18 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. (4) Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? (5) Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (6) That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. (7) Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. (8) The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. (9) Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? (10) Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? (11) Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. (12) If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? (13) And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (14) And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: (15) That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. (16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2004
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 - 9:34 pm:

grace2u,

Living in denial does not absolve you of the fact that you have added to the scriptures with your erroneous claim that the 'seed' in Gen. 3:15 is 'spiritual' seed.

I have carefully provided you the proof and it is time to have you acknowledge your error. Or, at least, you can admit, then, that you are an Eve worshipper instead of a Christian.

I don't think that you do worship Eve, so let's get your acknowledgement behind us, so that we can go forward with your edification of the other scriptures that you have raised.

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4368
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.252.211

Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 2:00 am:

I think it would be helpful to give some a lesson in the use of punctuation. Why? So that you will understand what strong's is trying to tell you with the definitions.

Look at the definition for "seed" used in Gen.315 in strong's.

H (for Hebrew)2233; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity:- x carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

There is one semi-colon after the word "seed". We are looking for the definition of that one word. The semi-colon after the H2233 is telling us this is about the word seed followed after the semi-colon.

We use the semi-colon to:
[ ; ]

to help sort out a monster list:
There were citizens from Bangor, Maine; Hartford, Connecticut; Boston, Massachusetts; and Newport, Rhode Island.
OR
We had four professors on our committee: Peter Wursthorn, Professor of Mathematics; Ronald Pepin, Professor of English; Cynthia Greenblatt, Professor of Education; and Nada Light, Professor of Nursing.

to separate closely related independent clauses:
My grandmother seldom goes to bed this early; she's afraid she'll miss out on something.
The semicolon allows the writer to imply a relationship between nicely balanced ideas without actually stating that relationship. (Instead of saying because my grandmother is afraid she'll miss out on something, we have implied the because. Thus the reader is involved in the development of an idea�a clever, subliminal way of engaging the reader's attention.)

It is rare, but certainly possible, that you will want a semicolon to separate two independent clauses even when those two independent clauses are connected by a coordinating conjunction. This is especially true when the independent clauses are complex or lengthy and when there are commas within those independent clauses. You might consider breaking those two independent clauses into separate sentences when this happens.
example:
Coach Auriemma realized that his next recruiting class contained two superb guards, a fine post player, and a power forward; but as of the end of the spring recruiting season, he was still pushing to discover better first-year players for the interior positions.

Which of these uses is best for our lesson? Wouldn't it be to sort out a monster list. If you look at the definition punctuation, note that the semi-colon after seed separates the rest of the words from the word we are defining (seed).
to be cont.

grace2u
Advanced Member
Username: grace2u

Post Number: 677
Registered: 3-2005
Posted From: 70.178.195.217

Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 2:04 am:

OK watchman. I never meant it to come out that way. God knows my heart. What I meant to say was that satan's seed was spiritual - the Bible says he is the father of lies. So you can see that what his offspring is are words.

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4369
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.252.211

Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 2:05 am:

Now, there are no other semi-colons so we know all the words after the semi-colon are figurative. But, there's a colon. What does the colon here mean?

Use a colon [ : ] before a list or an explanation that is preceded by a clause that can stand by itself. Think of the colon as a gate, inviting one to go on:
examples:
There is only one thing left to do now: confess while you still have time.
The charter review committee now includes the following people:
the mayor
the chief of police
the fire chief
the chair of the town council
You nearly always have a sense of what is going to follow or be on the other side of the colon.

So let's look at the definition again. All of the figurative words can stand by themselves. The words after them just invite you to go on.

The point I am trying to make is this. All of the words defining "seed" here are figurative, not literal. So Gen. 3:15 is talking about satan's purposes, not literal children, being fruitful; or many men will follow him. Just as we who are Jesus' disciples will be known by our fruits, not the number of children we have. Some people can't have children. Figuratively, Abel, who was the righteous child (Cain and Abel having the same father), was to be the seed whose line led to Jesus Christ. But Cain made the choice to murder him for evil reasons; jealousy, anger over God's pleasure with Abel's offering. That is why when Adam knew Eve again and she conceived Seth, he replaced the seed (the line to Christ) that God told satan in the garden would "bruise his head", Eve saying "for God has appointed me another "seed" instead of Abel. Everything that happens to the righteous men (the enmity to her seed) from Noah to Christ, that God chose for His purposes, was caused because satan tried to destroy the line to Jesus: Jesus Christ Himself.
satan failed because Jesus was born, lived a sinless life, died and was resurrected. Now satan has turned his attention to the woman; the body of Christ who is the church, (Revelation). It's got nothing to do with Kenites or the power of satan; which fails under God's power. It's got everything to do with the promised seed, Jesus Christ; showing the might, the majesty, the loving mercy, and the glory of God; He alone deserves the praise. It's His promise to us.
-Vivian

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2005
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 11:18 am:

grace2u,

I am not questioning your heart. Surely, God knows all hearts.

However, I am questioning your analysis. Undoubtedly, the 'seed' in reference to the woman in Gen. 3:15 is actual literal offspring. God goes through all the lineage from Adam to Christ in order prove it.

It is the height of irresponsibility for you then to suggest that the 'seed' in reference to the serpent is some how 'spiritual' and not literal offspring as it is with the woman. The seed reference is the same for the serpent as it is for the woman.

That is why your effort to sidetrack the debate with 1 Peter and John 3 scriptures is not valid. To accept the meaning of the 'seed' as spiritual would leave us as Eve worshippers instead of Christians. Gen. 3 is dispositive on its own accord with regard to proof that the serpent has offspring.

You let your theology dictate the interpretation, thereby leading to misinterpretation. It is better to let the truth dictate one's theology. Otherwise, people become defacto idol worshippers for they worship their church over God's truth.

arron
Senior Member
Username: arron

Post Number: 3182
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.119.35.160

Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 12:38 pm:

murray teaches that the white race is the one deccended from adam who was white ruddy faced and able to blush . in doing this he is teaching that the white race is the true race and therefore he is a racist. he always says go to the word.. yet when you do you will find it is different from what he says. that is like when one told me to go to the door of the ark that is always how they answered, well i went to the door of the ark and could not find what they said and told them so at which they got mad

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4373
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.248.69

Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 1:01 pm:

H (for Hebrew)2233; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity:- x carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2012
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 11:06 am:

godchild,

How ignorant are you??? The figurative definition of seed is posterity.

LOL!

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2013
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 11:10 am:

arron,

Are you attempting to surpass godchild as the biggest liar on Factnet?

arron
Senior Member
Username: arron

Post Number: 3183
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.119.35.160

Posted on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 12:18 pm:

no i think you hold that title and no one can surpass you in being the bigest liar.
murray does believe that for i heard it from the "horses mouth" so to speak... murrays himself

getagrip
Advanced Member
Username: getagrip

Post Number: 603
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 72.77.188.86

Posted on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 12:36 pm:

Oh NOOO, godchild and arron are NOT the biggest liars on Factnet.. but I know who is.

We should start a poll!

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4383
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.250.136

Posted on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 5:15 pm:

I'm all for that.

It would require the accuser to quote uncut posts as evidence, plus the one's being responded to. The liars are famous for just saying "He's a liar, she's a liar", without any evidence at all. Then all their friends chime in behind him/her saying "I agree" without any evidence.

To be fair, evidence should be based on past posts, not on the fact that you can't stand someone because you hate that they are being listened to.

skooter942000
Intermediate Member
Username: skooter942000

Post Number: 189
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 4.243.194.55

Posted on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 6:33 pm:

Yes, posterity = (A second Witness)

figuratively """fruit"""

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4386
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.247.244

Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 2:47 am:

fig�ur�a�tive
�adjective 1. of the nature of or involving a figure of speech, esp. a metaphor; metaphorical; not literal: a figurative expression.

met�a�phor 1. a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in �A mighty fortress is our God.� Compare mixed metaphor, simile (def. 1).
2. something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.

lit�er�al�ly
�adverb 1. in the literal or strict sense: What does the word mean literally?
2. in a literal manner; word for word: to translate literally.
3. actually; without exaggeration or inaccuracy: The city was literally destroyed.
4. in effect; in substance; very nearly; virtually.

All the definitions given for seed are "figurative", not "literal", or it would have said, "(literally) posterity".

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2018
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 11:01 am:

godchild,

Wonderful! You have a dictionary.

LOL! Still don't know how to use Strong's yet do you. The figuarative meanings are provided for the word 'seed'.

The figurative meaning is posterity. That's it. No further debate necessary.

Sorry, you lose.

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4390
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.249.129

Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 12:25 pm:

watchman is clearly showing his cultic mentality. When someone is brainwashed to the extent he is, they are unable to distinguish between fact (literal) and fiction (figurative).
-Vivian

skooter942000
Intermediate Member
Username: skooter942000

Post Number: 193
Registered: 3-2006
Posted From: 4.243.221.216

Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 1:42 pm:

a Puzzle

SUN
Nothing
_______
= NEW

Mat 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Mat 23:24 [Ye] blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

Mat 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.

Mat 23:26 [Thou] blind Pharisee, cleanse first that [which is] within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead [men's] bones, and of all uncleanness.

Mat 23:28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2023
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 2:20 pm:

godchild wrote,

watchman is clearly showing his cultic mentality. When someone is brainwashed to the extent he is, they are unable to distinguish between fact (literal) and fiction (figurative).

LOL She now thinks that figurative use of words is fiction. Hahaha

Come on lady -- you just continue to dig yourself a deeper hole.

Since you then believe the entire Bible is literal, perhaps you can explain the orchard growing contest between a snake and the woman in Gen. 3:15, which produces fruit so large that the seeds of the fruit bruise heads and heels. While you are at it, why did the KJV translators insert the word "his" in this scripture with reference to the word "heel".

You are one whacked-out nut case.

godchild
Senior Member
Username: godchild

Post Number: 4397
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 205.215.247.119

Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 4:48 pm:

You must be looking in the mirror again. I didn't say the whole Bible is literal, or that the whole Bible is figurative. I said the word "seed" as used in Genesis 3:15, according to Strong, is FIGURATIVE. The problem with you and your other cult members is you haven't been taught how to tell the difference. I'm trying to help you.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2024
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 9:28 pm:

godchild,

You are hilarious! You just keep digging deeper.

I have been telling you the word "seed" in Gen. 3:15 was figurative for at least a year now.

The appropriate figurative meanings are:

H2233

zera‛
zeh'-rah
From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

Those are the appropriate figurative meanings. Of course, the only one that fits the context of Gen. 3:15 is 'posterity'.

You are totally clueless.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4877
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 10:38 pm:

abbzeq
Senior Winnower
Posts: 1448
(1/27/07 9:32 pm)
Reply Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok thanks buddy.....that was great but i was hoping to get just one large picture of each quite a bit larger if you could.....and then if you dont mind finding and putting up a picture of a really pretty looking red haired woman about the age of 35 and do the same thing for a blonde haied woman.
Place both pictures directly under the 4 large pictures of bette and barbra etc.

I challenge any human being on planet earth to convice me or anyone else here that these 4 people of the 'kenite persuassion' shall we say, look like Hebrews.
Cmon now.....no more mouthing off jibberish about some invisible people b.s......put your money where your mouth is.
Teashshur
Junior Winnower
Posts: 1389
(1/27/07 9:39 pm)
Reply
Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so, you mean that red-heads are kenites?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Num 24:24 And ships shall come from the coast of Chittim, and shall afflict Asshur, and shall afflict Eber, and he also shall perish for ever.
jenny1969
Senior Master Tiller
Posts: 231
(1/28/07 1:39 am)
Reply Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I have very blonde hair and very blue eyes. I also seem to have sort of a long face, pointy chin, and sort of a long pointy nose. I definitely don't have the squinty eyes-they are round as can be, but one of my daughter's has them-uh oh!!!
What does that mean?
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
rojo2635301
Senior Master Tiller
Posts: 220
(1/28/07 4:47 pm)
Reply Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbzeq says in post 1444;

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing that amazes me is that the guy who professes to be a teacher over there has no idea how angels could obtain male sexual organs.
He also believes that kenites look 100% ecactly like Hebrews.....what a recipe for paranoia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abbzeq, here you are again, placing confusion amongst the wheat with your overzealous determination to ignore what Jesus tells us with regards to the sons of Cain. Particularly with regard to His simple explanation of a parable in Matt 13:37 - 43.

Mat 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Mat 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

You continue to disregard Christ�s answer regarding our association with them as He points out in Matt 13:29 -30.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4878
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 10:39 pm:

Copied verbatim off of the "fig tree". A Shepherd Chapel "student" forum site.

"olivemas
Senior Noontender
Posts: 944
(1/27/07 3:02 pm)
Reply
Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not pointing any fingers just helping to bring somethingto the subject. I do notice a sameness sort of.

Your
Friend
Marc

abbzeq
Senior Winnower
Posts: 1446
(1/27/07 4:17 pm)
Reply Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell you what Olive.....since I have no idea how to do the picture thing.....once a week we should add a new face to that picture of faces you made up.....lets add another one today.....how bout that brown haired woman from the view.....the one that looks exactly like bette and barb.

Lets test the theory out to see if the kenites are as invisible as some people claim they are.
My opinion is that they have about 12 or 13 different facial characteristics depending on which tribe their pappy infected and then a number of other characteristics depending on what race their pappy and his buddies have polluted.

So lets just stick with the one specific type of facial characteristic which bette barb the woman from the view and many more media people have.

Lets see how people who agree with Jim's theory argue their way out of this one.....but they wont.....because they cant.
Theyll just continue to be bullies and hurl insults even in the face of absolute reality.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4879
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 10:42 pm:

continued from fig tree

"abbzeq
Senior Winnower
Posts: 1448
(1/27/07 9:32 pm)
Reply Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok thanks buddy.....that was great but i was hoping to get just one large picture of each quite a bit larger if you could.....and then if you dont mind finding and putting up a picture of a really pretty looking red haired woman about the age of 35 and do the same thing for a blonde haied woman.
Place both pictures directly under the 4 large pictures of bette and barbra etc.

I challenge any human being on planet earth to convice me or anyone else here that these 4 people of the 'kenite persuassion' shall we say, look like Hebrews.
Cmon now.....no more mouthing off jibberish about some invisible people b.s......put your money where your mouth is.
Teashshur
Junior Winnower
Posts: 1389
(1/27/07 9:39 pm)
Reply
Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so, you mean that red-heads are kenites?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Num 24:24 And ships shall come from the coast of Chittim, and shall afflict Asshur, and shall afflict Eber, and he also shall perish for ever.
jenny1969
Senior Master Tiller
Posts: 231
(1/28/07 1:39 am)
Reply Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I have very blonde hair and very blue eyes. I also seem to have sort of a long face, pointy chin, and sort of a long pointy nose. I definitely don't have the squinty eyes-they are round as can be, but one of my daughter's has them-uh oh!!!
What does that mean?
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
rojo2635301
Senior Master Tiller
Posts: 220
(1/28/07 4:47 pm)
Reply Re: The sin in the garden/do not 'touch' the tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbzeq says in post 1444;

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing that amazes me is that the guy who professes to be a teacher over there has no idea how angels could obtain male sexual organs.
He also believes that kenites look 100% ecactly like Hebrews.....what a recipe for paranoia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abbzeq, here you are again, placing confusion amongst the wheat with your overzealous determination to ignore what Jesus tells us with regards to the sons of Cain. Particularly with regard to His simple explanation of a parable in Matt 13:37 - 43.

Mat 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Mat 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

You continue to disregard Christ�s answer regarding our association with them as He points out in Matt 13:29 -30.

(Message edited by franklin on February 03, 2007)

(Message edited by franklin on February 03, 2007)

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4880
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 10:43 pm:

continued quotes from the fig tree

"Mat 13:29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

You then say that this is a recipe for paranoia! Take a look a yourself and see if the paranoia is not with your own beliefs and your interpretation of God�s Word.

2 Pet 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

Many times have I heard Pastor Murray say that he gets a thrill out of having a Kenite turn from his former ways and become a believer.

With regard to your above quote �The thing that amazes me is that the guy who professes to be a teacher over there has no idea how angels could obtain male sexual organs.�

Well Abbzeq, tell me and all of us how this can be, since I too do not know how.

I read that Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Consequently I believe that since God is the Creator of all souls, that there was/is no need to allow angels to have reproductive organs and that those are only needed in this flesh age, remember we are the children of God. Furthermore God provided us with the ability to, if you like, create our own family and children in order that we may understand the dilemma that He faces, since a third of His children went astray and followed Lucifer.

I believe that this flesh age is nothing more than Satan�s and our final trial, with all of His children being the Jurors, in order that we all may understand the consequence of the Great White Throne Judgment.

Take for example an average Presidential election in the USA. In the 2004 election there were a record number of voters that turned out to cast their ballot, the total of which was 120 million votes or 60% of editable voters. That means that 40% did not vote or 80 million people did not vote as they were either undecided, didn�t care or were not able.

Now lets use that as an example of how it was in the first Earth Age, as we are told that ;

1 Cor 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Therefore lets say, for ease of calculation, that there were 30 billion souls that God had created in the First Earth Age and we know that one third followed after Satan Rev 12:4. What happened to the other 20 billion souls? Did they like the last election of 2004 have some 10 billion souls side with God and the remaining 10 billion not care or were undecided? I think that is a good possibility, and that is why we are here during this one week trial, 2 Pet 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Now with reference to your statement �He also believes that kenites look 100% exactly like Hebrews.�

What is a Hebrew? The first use of this word is in Gen 14:13 and is defined, as Pastor Murray would say, taking it back to it�s root, those from across the river. Now you may be trying to mix and misinterpret Hebrew for Israelite and if so then we need to see what an Israelite is. We do know that there were, when called by Joseph into Egypt, 70 souls.

Gen 46:27 And the sons of Joseph, which were born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten.

Now were all of these people of one race? How much intermingling with other races had taken place among these 70 as they enter Egypt?"

(Message edited by franklin on February 03, 2007)

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4881
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 10:44 pm:

Lets fast forward 430 years and see how many came out of Egypt. We are told that there were;

Exo 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.
Exo 12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

Ok, now we have about 600,000 men plus wives plus children which could easily put the number to more then 1 � million people. Plus we have a mixed multitude of who knows how many that went with them into the wilderness for 40 years. These people that Moses brought forth out of Bondage in Egypt were now all call Israelites although I highly doubt that they were all direct blood descendants of Jacob (Israel).

Add to this the foolish mistake that Joshua did, after crossing the Jordan out of the wilderness, when he made a truce with those that God had commanded they should kill and as a result;

Josh 9:27 And Joshua made them that day hewers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation, and for the altar of the LORD, even unto this day, in the place which he should choose.

Fast forwarding again we see the captivity of the 10 tribes by Assyria and then the captivity of the final 2 tribes by Babylon and as a result after leaving the Babylonian captivity we see that the whole priesthood had been taken over by strangers. Who then knows how much more intermingling had taken place amongst the masses?

We then claim to be part and parcel of the ten lost tribes who went over the Caucuses mountains, settling throughout Europe and then onto the Americas, while all the time keeping our lineage as pure as the driven snow.

Therefore the conclusion of the matter is not where your roots lie but rather where your heart lies, be it in the truth and acceptance of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ or do you shun the truth and are you being impregnated by the lies of the false one, believing that you are special due to your purity in claiming your inheritance simply by lineage.

John 8:37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.

You do not need genealogy records to claim your prize, why even the sons of Cain can believe and accept it.

Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

You can look like the hunchback of Notre Dame or Elephant man, it simply does not matter! All that matters is what is in your heart!

Agape� "

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2097
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 1:15 am:

franklin,

You are off topic.

This topic is dedicated to why you folks cannot recognize that Cain's father was Satan. Your posts above have nothing to do with the topic.

(Message edited by Watchman 2 on February 06, 2007)

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4905
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 2:46 am:

Since when have you been concerned about staying on topic. What's the matter? Do the posts above reveal the racism and anti semitism of all of you SC "students".

By the way I started this topic. And where this anti scriptural heresy leads to is pertinent to the topic.

You pervert the Bible and Genesis 4:1 because you hate the Jews.

We will not recognize that Cain's father is satan because it is not true. No where in the Bible does it say that. Only in your twisted, perverted dreams of your cult leader arnie it does. Because he follows a different master than Christ. arnie follows the master perverter of God's word. He follows satan himself.

smyrna
Senior Member
Username: smyrna

Post Number: 1785
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 148.70.237.172

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 4:17 am:

Funny how the geneology in Luke 3 does not mention Cain, but Seth.

Franklin can't explain that, and that is why he never goes past Genesis 4:1.

He also wrote: "We will not recognize that Cain's father is satan because it is not true. No where in the Bible does it say that."

"Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one..." John 3:12.

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." -Jesus in John 8:44.

Why would Cain be excluded from the Luke 3 geneaology, unless he was NOT Adam's son?

Finally,since Frankie does not believe in cross referencing and would rather take verses out of the context of the Bible as a whole, how can he explain, without relying on any other Scripture, this passage:

"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother...he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26).

Is Frankie prepared to say that Jesus taught His followers to hate their parents?

Let's see if Frankie turns himself into a "master perverter" to explain this passage.

fatherofaking
Senior Member
Username: fatherofaking

Post Number: 1431
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 71.161.72.72

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 7:45 am:

i'm a little bored so i think i will play this game for a little while.

an answer as to why cain is not in the luke 3 geneology coming soon.

for now,
if you look closely there are many who are missing from that passage.
there is a reason and i will tell you what that reason is in a bit.

fatherofaking
Senior Member
Username: fatherofaking

Post Number: 1432
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 71.161.72.72

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 8:08 am:

there are many geeologies like this one.

in fact every one of them from the first to the last show only the one's who carried on the message of one god.

cain and his decendants gave up that right when cain killed abel.

cain was made in the image of adam.
he had a conscience just ike everyone else.

this shows that god was concerned about cains soul.
god himself said that cain was abel's brother.

Ge 4:6 And Jehovah said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

Ge 4:7 If thou doest well, shall it not be lifted up? and if thou doest not well, sin coucheth at the door: and unto thee shall be its desire, but do thou rule over it.

Ge 4:9 And Jehovah said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: am I my brother`s keeper?

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2098
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 8:51 am:

fatherofaking,

The brother reference is not dispositive of anything. See Strong's for meaning.

H251

'âch
awkh
A primitive word; a brother (used in the widest sense of literal relationship and metaphorical affinity or resemblance (like H1)): - another, brother (-ly), kindred, like, other. Compare also the proper names beginning with �Ah-� or �Ahi-�.

You wrote,

cain was made in the image of adam.

There is no scripture that supports your claim.

You also wrote,

cain and his decendants gave up that right when cain killed abel.

That's pure speculation...no scriptural support here either.

Cain would not be entitled to inheritance from Adam because he was not Adam's son.

fatherofaking
Senior Member
Username: fatherofaking

Post Number: 1433
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 71.161.72.72

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 10:05 am:

i am sorry watchman i am going to have to continue this another time.

you might want to take a look at what the qabala has to say about the translation of gen. 3:20.

i can see how you would draw the conclusions you do with the tools you have.

this is a good place to start.
http://www.psyche.com/psyche/suares/cain2.html

i will be back to discuss it with you when i can.

it is an interesting study.

(Message edited by fatherofaking on February 06, 2007)

fatherofaking
Senior Member
Username: fatherofaking

Post Number: 1434
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 71.161.72.72

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 10:10 am:

http://www.psyche.com/psyche/suares/cain2.html

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4906
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 5:10 pm:

Luke 3

"23And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

24Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,

25Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,

26Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,

27Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,

28Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,

29Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,

30Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,

31Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,

32Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,

33Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,

34Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,

35Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,

36Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,

37Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,

38Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God."

Duh, Jesus was descended from Seth who was from Adam. Jesus was not descended from Cain. Though Cain was a ancestral FULL uncle to Jesus.

I will be glad to discuss any scripture with anybody to prove that arnie is a LIAR!

Here's one for you....

Genesis 4

17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

So why do you accept that Enoch is Cain's son. Yet in Genesis 4:1...

"1And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD."

you claim that is a lie and that satan is Cain's father.

Your whole serpent seed heresy is one big fat LIE!

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2101
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 5:45 pm:

Cain and Abel were twins as is shown in Gen. 4:2.

The woman was already pregnant in Gen. 3:15.

The woman received the name Eve from Adam in Gen. 3:20 because she was already pregnant.

Adam did not have sex with the woman until Gen. 4:1 and she was already named and pregnant.

This has been proven to franklin several dozen times now, and he still can't figure it out.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4908
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 6:03 pm:

Cain and Abel were twins as is shown in Gen. 4:2.

NOT!

The woman was already pregnant in Gen. 3:15.

NOT!

The woman received the name Eve from Adam in Gen. 3:20 because she was already pregnant.

NOT!

Adam did not have sex with the woman until Gen. 4:1 and she was already named and pregnant.

NOT!

This has been proven to franklin several dozen times now, and he still can't figure it out.

NOT!

Only in the sick, twisted, perverted mind of arnie and his "students"!

The world of Christianity whole heartedly rejects your non scriptural racist heresy!

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2104
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 7:06 pm:

franklin,

You wrote,

Your whole serpent seed heresy is one big fat LIE!

Then, you should have had no problem proving it false. Yet, all you do is issue denials and a littany of insults. Never once do you give a rational explanation for your beliefs supported by scripture, and that can pass the test of reproof.

You have no credibility whatsoever on this subject as well as most other subjects. Why don't you just stay at cultblunders and play your space cult fantasy games with your groupies there.

You are way out of your league here.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4909
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 7:57 pm:

No way brainwashed. I've been on factnet years before you showed up. And I'll be here years after you get banned.

Just two simple scriptures prove the serpent seed heresy to be a lie.

"1And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD."

17"And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch."

Either both are false according to arnie

or

both of them are true according to Moses!

Can't have it both ways. Either the Bible is a lie or it is true.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2107
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 8:29 pm:

LOL! How stupid are you??

OK -- since you are so ignorant that you think Moses put chapter, verse, and punctuation into the scriptures, thereby precluding the remainder of the birthing process in Gen. 4:2, I can prove you wrong by your one-verse Bible.

Gen 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

As you can see, Adam didn't have sex with "the woman". He had sex with "Eve".

How did Eve get her name praytell?

Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Gee--she already was pregnant, that's why Adam named her Eve.

So, Mr. space cult nut fantasy hero, where does it state in the Bible that Eve had an abortion/miscarriage so that Cain could be sired by Adam in accordance with your Biblical presumption?

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4913
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 9:11 pm:

That is the most convoluted, twisted bunch of shiite I've EVER read!

You can't be serious brainwashedman!

So by your illogical twisted perversions Cain's wife must have been pregnant by someone else too!

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived,

And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived,

So who was Cain's wife pregnant by????????

Bug's Bunny?

oneway
Junior Member
Username: oneway

Post Number: 38
Registered: 1-2007
Posted From: 72.16.59.189

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 9:41 pm:

I've been trying to read thru some of this topic but there are so many threads, so I haven't been able to conclude what the SCers actually believe, but I'm certain whatever it is, it is probably not Truth.

John 8:44 �Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Who do the SCers say the above verse is?
And for the record, Adam was Cain's father. Nothing else is scripturally possible in this regard.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4915
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 9:45 pm:

The crux of the whole serpent seed heresy is that those who call themselves Jews are the spawn of satan.

They hate Jews.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2108
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 10:11 pm:

oneway,

John 8:44 identifies these Pharisees as Kenites.

For the record, Satan is Cain's father--I already proved it.

oneway
Junior Member
Username: oneway

Post Number: 39
Registered: 1-2007
Posted From: 72.16.59.189

Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 - 10:28 pm:

watchman_2,

You Stated: "oneway,

John 8:44 identifies these Pharisees as Kenites.

That really wasn't what I was asking to understand. Like I had prev stated, I have not fully read all threads in these topics, but I get a sense that you tie John 8:44 with Cain. Who are you saying these Pharisees father is? Cain or the devil?

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2110
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 1:27 am:

oneway,

It isn't an either or question. John 8:44 also links Cain to Satan. The first murderer was Cain. The father of liars is Satan.

Those Pharisees that Christ addressed were Kenites.

ezekiel_37
Senior Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 1574
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 206.186.79.91

Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 5:46 pm:

To gain truth, one must leave tradition aside.

See the Word as a whole, and then the examples, types, and truths become noticable.

Peace in Christ
c

arron
Senior Member
Username: arron

Post Number: 3198
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.119.206.146

Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2007 - 9:35 pm:

if they were kenite then they were NOT jews for the jews are not kenites did not decend from the kenites. alos the kenites mentioned in GODS WORD THE BIBLE KJV were good with the exception of one or two time where it says somethig neg. about them

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4918
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.135.172

Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2007 - 11:01 pm:

"To gain truth, one must leave tradition aside."

That is just some crap that arnie says to let the brainwashing of your mind to begin.

ezekiel_37
Senior Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 1577
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 206.186.79.91

Posted on Monday, February 12, 2007 - 5:34 pm:

Arron, for you to think that the kenites are viewed positively, is a sin to your bible teacher. Maybe you should read the scriptures yourself and see another conclusion.

Peace in Christ
c

sharon
Advanced Member
Username: sharon

Post Number: 691
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 142.177.112.28

Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 3:42 pm:

Watchman your whole speech tells the story that Eve never had sex with the devil but with her husband... to whom she had children. What is it you are trying to say? Read you message again, you are not able to make it say what you want to make it say. Why?
Oneway... very nice... thanks

arron
Senior Member
Username: arron

Post Number: 3208
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.119.206.146

Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 4:36 pm:

and zeke it is you who need to read the bible and quit looking for ways to explain AWAY every thing the bible really says and make it say somthing else

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2182
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 7:50 pm:

sharon,

You need to read my posts again. It is quite clear what the scriptures tell us.

Cain was Satan's son.

termin8d
Intermediate Member
Username: termin8d

Post Number: 239
Registered: 7-2005
Posted From: 60.234.129.189

Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 7:58 pm:

1 And the man knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain and said, I have acquired a man, Jehovah.

Apparently Satan is a man.

still_small_voice
Senior Member
Username: still_small_voice

Post Number: 1215
Registered: 11-2006
Posted From: 207.200.116.135

Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 8:35 pm:

YLT: And the man knew Eve his wife, and she conceiveth and beareth Cain, and saith, 'I have gotten a man by Jehovah;'

And apparently satan somehow married Eve.

Excuse me? When did Eve divorce Adam?

And then she divorced satan and remarried Adam to bear the next child?

Please, this is very much corrupting the Word teaching some tradition of a man.

termin8d
Intermediate Member
Username: termin8d

Post Number: 242
Registered: 7-2005
Posted From: 60.234.129.189

Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 8:42 pm:

still_small_voice : It seems that no matter how many clear scriptures we put in front of these people, they will not budge an inch.

I would have to say one good thing that comes out of all this, is that we are able to delve into the word more, and be confident of the integrity of God's word through revelation upon revelation.

The Lord bless you still_small_voice. May He continue to be a rich supply to your whole being.

oneway
Member
Username: oneway

Post Number: 82
Registered: 1-2007
Posted From: 72.16.59.189

Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 10:50 pm:

termin8d,

you stated: "I would have to say one good thing that comes out of all this, is that we are able to delve
into the word more, and be confident of the integrity of God's word through revelation
upon revelation."

Exactly! I'm in complete agreement of what you stated. I enjoy searching the scriptures for truth
even more than ever now.

franklin
Senior Member
Username: franklin

Post Number: 4937
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 71.53.136.147

Posted on Saturday, February 17, 2007 - 10:54 pm:

Same here.

pilgrim
Intermediate Member
Username: pilgrim

Post Number: 376
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 195.93.21.134

Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 7:28 am:

To everyone,

I had looked at several english and spanish translations of Genesis 4:1 and and all the translations say in plain english or spanish that Adam was Cain's father.

It is so easy to understand that Adam was Cain's father that I find it hard to believe that anybody could give another interpretation to that verse. I could NOT personally give another interpretation unless I did it with the deliberate motive to twist the scriptures.
Adam was Cain's father.

Genesis 4:1 ( Below you can see several english translations that shows you that Adan was Cain's father in plain english.

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. (King James Version-KJV)

Adam [a] lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. [b] She said, "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth [c] a man." (New International Version)

Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, "I have gotten a manchild with the help of the LORD." (New American Standard Bible)

Adam slept with Eve his wife. She conceived and had Cain. She said, "I've gotten a man, with God's help!" (The Message)

Now Adam[a] had sexual relations with his wife, Eve, and she became pregnant. When she gave birth to Cain, she said, �With the Lord�s help, I have produced[b] a man!� (New Living Translation)

Adam [a] and Eve had a son. Then Eve said, "I'll name him Cain because I got [b] him with the help of the LORD." (Contemporary English Version)

Adam [a] made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. (Today's New International Version)

Adam made love to his wife Eve. She became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, "With the Lord's help I have had a baby boy." (New International Reader's Version)

ADAM WAS CAIN'S FATHER.

watchman_2
Senior Member
Username: watchman_2

Post Number: 2185
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 66.92.33.240

Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 1:07 pm:

It is amazing to me the lack of reading comprehension skills and critical analysis of folks here. Surely, it is a clear demonstration of lack of objectivity -- clouded by religion.

Let's look at the scripture again -

"And Adam knew Eve his wife and she conceived and bare Cain and said I have gotten a man from the LORD and she again bare his brother Abel"

The word 'again' means 'continued to', thereby making Cain and Abel twins [of a sort].

As anyone with average intelligence can ascertain, the woman already is called "Eve" when Adam first had sex with her. It isn't rocket science to figure out that she is already pregnant at the time Adam had sex with her.

Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

The proof is dispositive regarding this topic. Eve was already impregnated by someone else. Of course, the Bible tells us that the father of one of the twins was Satan [Gen. 3:14, Rev. 20:2]. Cain was the son of Satan. Abel was the son of Adam.

oneway
Member
Username: oneway

Post Number: 84
Registered: 1-2007
Posted From: 72.16.59.189

Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 1:38 pm:

watchman_2,

I thought it was already decided in this thread sometime ago that Adam was Cain's father. So are you actually trying to say he isn't? That's odd that you would be in opposition of the majority, LOL. Maybe you should rethink your conclusion.

fatherofaking
Senior Member
Username: fatherofaking

Post Number: 1537
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 71.161.72.72

Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 1:46 pm:

i am aware of some schools of thought on this idea.
none of them that i am aware of interpret this idea literally.

the concept is discussed primarily in the literature of the quabala.

there is also much in the gnostic literature.
they offer some insight into the nature of mankind when understood in a spiritual context.

what i don't understand is why anyone would take these ideas literally.

why is it so important to your worldview?
should we be looking over our shoulder whatching for kenites?
maybe we should pass laws so we can rid ourselves of them.

what is the point of all of this?

still_small_voice
Senior Member
Username: still_small_voice

Post Number: 1216
Registered: 11-2006
Posted From: 207.200.116.135

Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007 - 2:19 pm:

I don't know, I am curious in how it relates to the atonement and the election. I would assume if one was to adhere to such a view or there being satan humans and adam humans it somehow would lead to a view in a limited atonement. This is problematic in the light of Romans.

Did Christ suffer, die and atone for the sin of the righteous adamites? Or did he suffer, die, shed his blood to atone for the unrighteous satanites?

When it is written:

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God without

<span style="float:left"><a style="text-decoration: none" title="Goto the Home Page" target="_top" href="http://www.factnet.org"><img src="/images/dboardfactnet-heartlogo-144.jpg" style="border: 0;"></a></span>
WHO IS CAIN'S FATHER?