| Author | Message | ||
     franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4633 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
It is totally amazing that there would be any controversy on this subject. But I am curious as to what factnet readers believe. Who is Cain's earthly father? Here is 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." Appreciate you sharing your beliefs as to what that scripture passage means. Who is Cain's father? | ||
| arron Senior Member Username: arron Post Number: 3046 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 24.241.6.69 |
adam was the only man on earth and eve was the only woman and therefore adam was cains father | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2440 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 75.42.171.14 |
I have read the passage many times, and the book of fables and parables, called the bible, seems to be clear that cain is the son of adam and eve. No controversy with me. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1734 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
After getting his internet butt kicked at the Shepherd's Chapel thread regarding this topic, franklin runs and hides over here. Of course, anyone could go to cultbusters.com.au and see that franklin has initiated a mythical galactic war over the fact that he thinks Adam is Cain's father whereas, the scriptures are clear that Satan is Cain's father. He is here in effort to save face. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2401 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
I don't think running over here to the doctrines thread is hiding-this is a far more read topic area than Shepherds Chapel. And don't send anyone over to CB his thread has been read like 19,000 times so far-seems those aussies love it!  It seems when translated into English (which we all know how tricky translation can be) the Bible states Adam was the proud papa of Cain-hey a lot kids turn to murder but we can't blame it on Satan can we! | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2443 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.75.252.89 |
Even in a book of parables, it should be possible to derive the meaning of things, although more than most books the bible is convoluted, antiquated and difficult to get a handle on. One only needs to look at all of the xtians who argue with each other over what the inturpretation of something is. But, that aside: I have read genesis and it seems pretty clear to me that cain is the son of adam and eve. Watchman, I am curious how you come to the conclusion that that is not the case. My mind is open to your thoughts on this. Lets try to keep it simple. How do you come to this conclusion? Also, just so there is no confusion here; I agree with Franklin on very little and I believe that all of christianity is a cult, but let's forget that for now. In the mean time, I will spend a little time in the Jewish Tanakh to see what it might shed on the subject. | ||
| ba2 Advanced Member Username: ba2 Post Number: 728 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 165.189.16.135 |
There probably were millions of humans on earth 6,000 years ago when Adam was created, but the bible strongly infers that Adam was the father. 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. Technically, it does not say Adam is the father but it sure is inferred. I would say that if Adam is not the father, the author wanted you to think that he was. Of course, we all know that while motherhood has always been a fact, fatherhood has always been a belief | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1739 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
BW2 and ba2, The topic has been discussed thoroughly at the Shepherd's Chapel threads and under this topic, the Doctrine/Proofs subtopic, the Serpent Seed - Physical or Spiritual thread if you wish to research this matter. However, I'll get you started with this post. Yes, ba2 is correct when he writes that Gen. 4:1 only infers that Adam is Cain's father. And, if this was the only scripture to rely upon, I would derive the same conclusion. First, let's keep in mind that the Holy Scriptures, as originally written, did not contain chapter and verse numbers nor did they include punctuation. Hence, these things were added to the scriptures at a much later date [I won't elaborate further at this time]. So, if you consider text only and look at Gen. 4:2, you will see: Gen 4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. Clearly, this scripture is disjointed in that it covers more of the birthing process and then jumps to what these boys did after they grew up. Hence, if one takes the first clause out Gen. 4:2 and appends it to the end of Gen. 4:1 and drops the punctuation, you will get a complete picture of the births of Cain and Abel as follows: 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 I emboldened the word 'again' for it is the key to unlocking the scripture. In English, it has a wide range of meanings from an immediate occurrence to an occurrence sometime in the future. However, when one examines the meaning of the word in its original Hebrew, we see the following: H3254 יסף yâsaph yaw-saf' A primitive root; to add or augment (often adverbially to continue to do a thing): - add, X again, X any more, X cease, X come more, + conceive again, continue, exceed, X further, X gather together, get more, give moreover, X henceforth, increase (more and more), join, X longer (bring, do, make, much, put), X (the, much, yet) more (and more), proceed (further), prolong, put, be [strong-] er, X yet, yield. As you can see, the word 'again', as an adverb, solely means to continue to do that which the verb is doing. In this case, it is giving birth. Accordingly, if fully translated, the scripture should read, And Adam knew Eve his wife and she conceived and bare Cain and said I have gotten a man from the LORD and she continued to bare his brother Abel Properly interpreted the scriptures inform us that Cain and Abel were twins. You may be thinking so what, Gen. 4:1 indicates that Adam impregnated Eve. My answer would be true and, if there were no other scriptures relevant to the subject, I would also presume that Adam sired the twins. But, the scripture itself, as I have shown fully translated, can truly only be presumed to mean that Adam sired both or only one of the twins. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1740 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
There are other relevant scriptures that let us know whether Adam sired both or one of the twins. First, you can take note of the fact that Cain's geneology is separate from Adam's geneology. Cain's is given in Gen. 4:17-24 and Adam's in Gen 5:3-32. Since Cain had progeny, he would have been listed in Adam's geneology if, indeed, Cain was Adam's son. You will not find one instance in the scriptures where it states that Adam begat Cain or that Cain was the son of Adam. Second, there is the issue of Eve being pregnant before having sex with Adam. If you look at Gen. 3:15, you can see the first prophecy of the Bible in that it establishes the lineage from Eve to Christ. In Gen. 3:16, you can see that God promised to "multipy her conception", which infers that she is already pregnant. The naysayers will claim that God is speaking about the same sexual act by Adam that was described in Gen. 4:1. An examination of the scriptures proves that this can never be the case. In Gen. 4:1, it states in part, And Adam knew Eve his wife . . . As you can see, when Adam had sex in Gen. 4:1, his wife had already been named as Eve. If you look in Gen. 3:15-16, you will see that the woman had not been named yet. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that Eve was already pregnant as of Gen. 3:15-16 before she conceived from Adam in Gen. 4:1. This fact is confirmed in Gen. 3:20 when the woman was given her name, Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living. This scripture does not state that she will become pregnant at some future date to become the mother of all living, but that she WAS, denoting already, the mother of all living. Of course, this leaves the question then as to who made Eve pregnant in Gen. 3:15-16 since it was not Adam. The answer is given in Gen. 3:14, Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: As you can see, the serpent did the deed. Now, the naysayers may claim that the serpent was a literal snake and therefore incapable of mating with a woman; however, they would be wrong. The scriptures identify who the serpent really is, Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, So, we know that Satan impregnated Eve and has offspring. This completes the other half of the prophecy given in Gen. 3:15. Satan is the father of Cain and Adam is the father of Abel. Hope this helps you out. | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 534 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.192.99.67 |
First, let's keep in mind that the Holy Scriptures, as originally written, did not contain chapter and verse numbers nor did they include punctuation. Although you are correct about the chapter and verse numbers, you are completely wrong about punctuation. Do you seriously think that the entire Tanakh was originally just ONE really long sentence? That is just as silly as some people claiming that Hebrew doesn’t have past/future tenses. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1742 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, From E.W. Bullinger's "How To Enjoy The Bible" The Greek Manuscripts have, practically, no system of punctuation: the most ancient, none at all; and the later MSS nothing more than an occasional single point even with the middle, or in line with the top of the letters. Where there is anything more than this it is generally agreed that it is the work of a later hand. So that in the Original Manuscripts we have no guide whatever to any dividing of the Text, whether rightly or wrongly. Indeed, in the most ancient MSS there is not only no division at all, but there is not even any break between the words! So that we can find no help from the MSS. When they came to be collated, edited, and printed, a system of punctuation was introduced by the respective Editors. Each one followed his own plan, and exercised his own human judgment. No two editors have punctuated the text in the same way; so that we have no help from them. When we come to the English Authorized Version we are still left without guidance or help. The Authorized Version of 1611 is destitute of any authority; for the Translators punctuated only according to their best judgment. But even here, few readers are aware of the many departures which have been made from the original Edition of 1611; and how many changes have been made in subsequent Editions.* These changes affect not merely punctuation, but the marginal notes and references, the uses of capital letters and italic type, orthography, grammatical peculiarities, etc. Some of these differences arise doubtless from oversight, but other changes have been made undoubtedly with deliberate intent. Who made them, or when they were introduced, no one can tell. A few, however, can be traced.* A full account of these may be seen in the Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Queen's Printers' Patent, 1859, a Blue Book full of interesting information; also in DR. SCRIVENER'S Preface to The Cambridge Paragraph Bible of 1873. I can see the punctuation lapse was stated for the Greek manuscripts. Bullinger does not make such a direct statement for the Hebrew manuscripts, but only by inference when he includes the 1611 KJV. Thanks for your input. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1743 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, My further research suggests that I was correct about my original statement regarding punctuation. From the Publisher’s Preface of “The Interlinear Bible”, by Jay P. Green Sr.: Punctuation and Capitalization – It should be realized that in the original Biblical languages, both Hebrew and Greek, all letters were capital letters, . . . It should also be noted that there was no punctuation in the original manuscripts, either in the Hebrew or Greek. In the Hebrew text which we are using for this volume, the Masoretes (c. 700 a.d.) have placed certain punctuation marks for the benefit of the Hebrew reader. In this work we have generally followed the Masoretic punctuation, keeping in mind that punctuation is an aid to the reader. . . . | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4636 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
Thank you everyone. What I wanted was your opinions. Not whether you believe the Bible or whether you are a Christian. This topic is for everyone who can read. What does Genesis 4:1 say. Who is Cain's father? Thanks!  | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1745 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
franklin, At least give them a chance to evaluate the information. Even ba2, noticed that it is only a presumption to conclude that Adam is Cain's father -- the scriptures never state "Adam begat Cain", nor do they state "Cain son of Adam". Folks, you will have to forgive poor old franklin -- you see, he has created a mythical starship and crew over at cultbusters.com.au and has made this issue his crusade. It would be most embarassing for him to admit he was wrong about the subject. I have asked him to square his one-verse analysis with the scriptures that I have outlined in my post. Of course, he cannot, so he lives a life of denial as you can see by his post above. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4638 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
Well let's see here.... hmmmm.. Genesis 4:1 says: "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." Then you say that Genesis blah, blah, blah, refutes that. Squint your eyes, stand on your head, read it right to left, rub your belly and pat your head at the same time chanting "ooommm ooommm", cross reference to Bullinger, who was a British racist by the way, translate from Greek to Hebrew, and then back again you might come up with the hare brained misinterpretation that some of the modern day Jews are descended from satan, known as the "Kenites". Let the readers decide what Moses meant when he wrote 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." | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4640 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
And by the way if you are going to plug Star Date One for me..... do it right! http://www.cultbusters.com.au/index.php?topic=145.msg7704;topicseen#top | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1748 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
You see folks -- franklin is a one-verse analyst. And, the one verse that he relies upon doesn't even state that Adam is Cain's father as ba2 pointed out. He will never answer the following question, Who made Eve pregnant as of Gen. 3:15? | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4643 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
"Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." No where does that say that Eve is pregnant. Eve does not become pregnant until Genesis 4:1. Genesis 4:1 says: "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." She became pregnant by Adam and had a single child named Cain. Searching the Bible for your proof that modern day Jews are evil spawns of satan "kenites" is like searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction!  Your dog and pony show, smoke and mirrors illusion does not cut the mustard as to true Bible study and interpretation. Get Real! | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1749 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Well folks, there you have it from franklin himself. Of course, for his position to be true, we have to believe: 1. Fruit seeds hate each other [See 'emnity']. 2. There are fruit seeds that are so large they bruise heads and heels. And, who is that 'his' person in this scripture?? Any amateur student of the Bible knows that Gen. 3:15 is describing the lineage from Eve to Christ. The word 'seed' means H2233 zera‛ zeh'-rah From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time. So, we can see that the word 'seed' can only mean fruit/plant or posterity. Well, it is easy to determine that plants don't hate each other. The scripture plainly speaks to the hatred between the serpent's offspring and Eve's offspring that leads to Christ. | ||
| ba2 Advanced Member Username: ba2 Post Number: 730 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 165.189.16.135 |
watchman: I don’t always agree with franklin, but you assume too much if you think I’m on your side in this. When I said it was only inferred that Adam was Cain’s father you should have seen that I said it more or less, tongue in cheek. If I were writing a book about my family and said I had sex with my wife, she became pregnant, and had a son, I sure would be suggesting that the son was mine. Yet, we all know that fatherhood is always faith, not necessarily fact. When they get older and you see a striking resemblance everyone could clearly see (not always) who they are related to. If the son looked a lot like the milkman and nothing like me, well, that might shake my faith. Clearly, the writer wanted the reader to believe that Adam was the father. Dig deep enough and you can find anything you want. But in no way do I believe that Eve had sex with a snake and that Cain was the offspring. By the way, didn’t Adam eat from that same tree of knowledge? Using your take, what the heck does that mean? If any of your interpretations were true, it would have been much more clearly written. It is all metaphoric anyway so who really cares if a separate race or culture was created? Would that mean we should condone some sort of genocide? We are clearly told that there is only one law we must follow, love. Promoting hatred clearly breaks that law. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1751 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
ba2, I did not assume that you agreed with me. I provided the proof in my post above. Languages are a funny thing. What may be perfectly understood by those at the time Moses scribed the words of God, when tranliterated into English, may be confusing to us today. Even Christ spoke in parables that his own disciples did not readily understand until Christ elaborated. So, I don't agree with your assessment, If any of your interpretations were true, it would have been much more clearly written. There is no reasonable basis for such opinion since the scripture was written long ago, in a different language, and only transliterated into English. Moses only laid out the story as God gave it to him. It was God that may have left it somewhat confusing to separate out the half-assed student [franklin] from good students [2Tim 2:15]. With some due diligence, as I have done, the truth is ascertainable. Yes, Adam did also partake of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. It all means that the sin committed in the Garden was not eating an apple -- it was sex. See Gen. 3:7 You engaged in the topic and now you have been edified. It is your decision whether or not to receive the Truth. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2406 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
Clearly, the writer wanted the reader to believe that Adam was the father. Dig deep enough and you can find anything you want. But in no way do I believe that Eve had sex with a snake and that Cain was the offspring. By the way, didn’t Adam eat from that same tree of knowledge? Using your take, what the heck does that mean? If any of your interpretations were true, it would have been much more clearly written. It is all metaphoric anyway so who really cares if a separate race or culture was created? Would that mean we should condone some sort of genocide? We are clearly told that there is only one law we must follow, love. Promoting hatred clearly breaks that law. That was fantastic Ba2!!! have a very Merry Christmas with your loved ones! | ||
| ba2 Advanced Member Username: ba2 Post Number: 732 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 165.189.16.135 |
watchman_2 You said, “It was God that may have left it somewhat confusing to separate out the half-assed student [franklin] from good students.” Good teachers find a way to get the poor students to understand the concepts. Your take would make God a bad teacher. You also said, “Moses scribed the words of God, when tranliterated into English, may be confusing to us today. Even Christ spoke in parables that his own disciples did not readily understand until Christ elaborated.” I somewhat agree, I say it is impossible to translate two languages perfectly, even if both are native to the translator. Add to that, if Moses actually did scribe anything, it was in Egyptian picture writing, not Hebrew. So the future Hebrew bible writers would have had an even more difficult time with that word for word translation. This is exactly why I always say we can’t take anything written as being literally accurate. We must use science and common sense to interpret. In my opinion, you reach way too far in your interpretation of scripture and it does not promote love of our neighbor. It seems to me that you are trying to find scripture to justify some deep seeded hatred of some other people. Suggesting that partaking in the tree of knowledge meant sex is a stretch. As I said, there were probably millions of humans on earth when Adam was created, so sex was not something new. rachel Merry Christmas to you too. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2409 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
Ba2 said,"It seems to me that you are trying to find scripture to justify some deep seeded hatred of some other people. Suggesting that partaking in the tree of knowledge meant sex is a stretch. As I said, there were probably millions of humans on earth when Adam was created, so sex was not something new" It is so important for people to see that about these groups who promote the "serpent seed" doctrine. They have been reminding of the Stepford Wives a bit-everything looks great on the outside but when you dig deeper you find some very scary ideas... R | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1752 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
ba2, You wrote, Good teachers find a way to get the poor students to understand the concepts. Your take would make God a bad teacher. I certainly disagree. God is an excellent teacher. It just takes some sincere effort on the poor student's [franklin's] part to comprehend it. Christ let us know that many would not understand his parables as well. Since none of us have first-hand knowledge of Moses' original work, I guess the debate will go on as to the language he used to scribe God's words. If your contention that he wrote in Egyptian picture form is correct, then the translation into Hebrew would add one more complication to the process. Nonetheless, the earliest writing that we have is in Hebrew and the KJV is based upon the transliteration thereof. Based upon the Hebrew, there are many words that can be taken both literally or figuratively and some words that are only one or the other. Of course, there are figures of speech, idioms, metaphors, allegories, etc. to contend with as well. Thus, in order to get the proper interpretation, one has to place the wording in context and utilize the rest of the scriptures for reproof [2Tim. 3:16]. You wrote, It seems to me that you are trying to find scripture to justify some deep seeded hatred of some other people. Suggesting that partaking in the tree of knowledge meant sex is a stretch. Not true at all! I search for the truth only. One can never square the scriptures with a theology that Adam was Cain's father. Obviously, you didn't look at Gen. 3:7. Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. They made aprons -- not masks. Remember, prior to the act, they were not ashamed of their nakedness [Gen. 2:25]. If you look at the words 'eat' and 'fruit' in Gen. 3:6, you will notice that these words are figurative as well as literal. The literal interpretation can never be squared with the scriptures. You are mistaken if you think that the scriptures do not speak in such terms. I'll not address your last point for I know that you support the theory of evolution. This subject was discussed on another thread and your theory was disproven. I think it quite the stretch for you to maintain its viability. Happy Holidays! | ||
| ba2 Advanced Member Username: ba2 Post Number: 734 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 165.189.16.135 |
Hi rachel, You said, “It is so important for people to see that about these groups who promote the "serpent seed" doctrine. They have been reminding of the Stepford Wives a bit-everything looks great on the outside but when you dig deeper you find some very scary ideas...” I sure agree with you on this one. The mind control put on many of these poor individuals is really effective and I can see first hand how they can’t seem to break away from unsound doctrine. I actually feel fortunate in that the control my wife is still under is not quite so dangerous, but it is dangerous none the less. Pretty nice weather for Dec 20th - wouldn’t you say. If I were younger, I’d swim across that big pond to see you. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2410 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
Ba that pond is way to cold you are right the weather is incredible!! I don't think it will be a white Xmas! I agree with you about this one-religion can be such a scary/deceiptful thing if you don't really get the full insight of the belief! Please don't feel, I am being flirty when I say this but I really do have great respect for the way you explain your ideas on religion. I find myself agreeing with so much of it. R (Message edited by rachelengland on December 20, 2006) | ||
| ba2 Advanced Member Username: ba2 Post Number: 736 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 165.189.16.135 |
rachel, Yes, that pond is pretty cold, but not yet frozen. I think we have a chance for snow tomorrow night and then maybe again on Saturday night. But I wouldn’t bet on it, more likely rain or freezing rain. Rachel, I know you are just having fun and not really being flirty. I do the same with you, a little anyway. You have a special place in my heart because you were the first person to respond to my first post. Until you responded, I thought I was being ignored. I found a few Jewish sites which were much more open and friendly but I could only discus some of the Jewish bible issues with them and get their interpretation regarding Judaism. This site is a wealth of knowledge for finding information regarding Christian cults and mind control issues. You were very harsh with me on that first response, but right on and I started getting good ideas shortly after that. It is nice to have someone agree with my take on things, now, if I could just get my wife to comply. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2412 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
"It is nice to have someone agree with my take on things, now, if I could just get my wife to comply". I know I was harsh that day, I just grew up in the same environment you find your wife in and at that particular time I was really giving up on the thought of God all together... I think that is what happens sometimes people go to far one way like TO-it's hard to find balance-but you have it. You are such a neat man with so much insight. May God continue to bless you as you continue on this adventure with your wife...R | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 535 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.192.99.67 |
Watchman I stand corrected, the Torah doesn’t have any punctuation as well as vowels. Anyways, you use a different bible than me, so your further analysis has no relation to me. But reading it through shows you make fantastical leaps of assumptions. Languages are not a funny thing when our bible uses the original language that is still used and taught to this day. I looked up what the original Hebrew says about these passages and unsurprisingly your Greek translations differ. (Transliterations are tough to type. Also I refuse to spell out G-d’s name, so I’ll use Lord instead) Gen 4:1-14 is out of strict time sequence. It actually takes place before the banishment from Eden, i.e. before Gen 3. At Gen 4:1, et Lord (with the Lord), instead of eem Lord means a partnership. When G-d created Adam and Eve, He did it alone. When Adam and Eve created Cain, they did it in partnership with the Lord. The name Cain is based on Cain-nay-neet which means “I acquired”. At Gen 4:1-2, the word et is repeated 3 times, et cain et ameen et havel (Abel). This teaches us that a twin sister was born with Cain and two were born with Abel. Vaht safe (continued), she continued or added to her family. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1757 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, I see that the matter of whether or not the punctuation was included in the original Hebrew manuscripts has been resolved. You wrote, I looked up what the original Hebrew says about these passages and unsurprisingly your Greek translations differ. Sir, you will have to clarify your comment. I certainly did not use the LXX or any Greek translation at all for the Hebrew. I used the Strong's Concordance for Hebrew translation. If you have a different source for your authority, please let me know so that I can check into it. I did cover the chronological sequencing of Gen. 4:1 in my comprehensive post above. Some Christians have made the same argument to justify Adam as the father of the serpent's seed as mentioned in Gen. 3:15. I did check the manuscripts in my interlinear to verify that the name "Eve" was associated with the word wife in Gen. 4:1. It is definitely there with the articl "eth" for emphasis. Hence, with the name Eve associated with the sexual union with Adam in Gen. 4:1, there can be no doubt that this act took place after they were kicked out of the Garden, after the pregnancy of Gen. 3:14-16 has been declared, and after Eve was given her name in Gen. 3:20. Accordingly, the source of information that you relied upon is in error. Since your source is in error, I won't elaborate on the other 2 points except to say that there is nothing in our KJV to support your contention that girls were born with Cain and Abel. Gen. 5 clearly states that the unnamed sons and daughters of Adam and Eve were born after Seth was born. Your reference is attempting to rewrite the Bible in order to answer the question as to the woman Cain married in the land of Nod. This comes from the Biblically illiterate view that presumes that Adam and Eve were the first people in existence. This view fails to account for the 6th Day creation. | ||
| ezekiel_37 Senior Member Username: ezekiel_37 Post Number: 1490 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 206.186.79.91 |
I was going to comment, but I won't now, as Watchman made the point that I would have spoken about. | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 537 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.192.99.67 |
watchman_2 I used the Strong's Concordance for Hebrew translation. If you have a different source for your authority, please let me know so that I can check into it. Strong’s Concordance?! That is a Christian work. My source is Rashi and Chabad. Jewish sages who know who to read and speak Hebrew. As I said earlier, we can’t compare our texts since we use two different bibles, we have two separate religions, and have different authoritative sources. While your analysis might work for your religion, it is meaningless and non-authoritative for my religion. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1762 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, I'll not get into qualifications of your sources vs. Dr. Strong. Since I am not a scholar in the field, I have no basis to discuss qualifications. However, I can say that your sources added to the scriptures with that twin daughter junk that you posted. Clearly, as I stated, that was an effort to explain Cain's wife. The order of events, even in the Tanakh, are the same as in the Christian scriptures. Your sources failed to consider the 6th Day creation of all of mankind which is compromising their interpretation of the scriptures. In fact, they are flat out wrong. I'll take Dr. Strong's work any day over your authorities -- at least I don't have to add to the scriptures to make them work. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2421 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
Watchman quotes;I'll take Dr. Strong's work any day over your authorities -- at least I don't have to add to the scriptures to make them work Well that is too be debated and many would disagree with that statement in fact many would call it a BOLDFACED LIE! | ||
| fatherofaking Senior Member Username: fatherofaking Post Number: 1289 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 71.161.77.17 |
hey yaakov, is your source available online? | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 539 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.192.99.67 |
Watchman You stay Christian (using Greek and Latin translations) and I'll stay Jewish (using the original Hebrew G-d given bible). BTW, your post contradicts itself. Since I am not a scholar in the field, I have no basis to discuss qualifications. and Your sources ... they are flat out wrong. | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2444 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 75.42.171.14 |
Well, after watching all of this back and forth, there are a few things that are undeniable. One is that there is a lot of arguement withing the xtian community about what the bible says. Another is that when controversy arises in life it is often good to go to the source of these issues and beliefs. Another is that the Jews, the ones who compiled and continue to protect this source of all of the worlds largest religions, do not accept Jesus as the messiah. So, with that said, I will take the Jewish interpretation of what the Jewish Bible says of the origin of Cain. Sorry, Watchman, but to me, you are using the bible's weakness, it's ability to be manipulate it's meaning by those with an agenda, to further yours. Thank you, everyone. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1763 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Nice try rachelengland -- you know that you are wrong. I backed up everything with scripture and did not add anything. Yet, you call me a liar -- just because your boyfriend, franklin, likes to make a fool of himself before he analyzes the scriptures. How sad it must be for you. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1764 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
bw2, I certainly understand how foolish this all looks from your prospective. You should keep in mind that the so-called Jewish prospective has been compromised by this very seed [offspring] of Satan. They are called Kenites [offspring of Cain] and pretend to be Jews [John 8:44, I John 3:12, Matt. 13:25-38, Rev. 2:9, 3:9]. This offsping of Satan has corrupted the Jewish religion to the point that many Jews follow a book called the Talmund moreso than the scriptures. Yaakov2, in my opinion, is a protector of such corrupted religion. You see how yaakov2 tries to conceal/protect the Kenites with his twisted analysis of Gen. 4. He certainly wouldn't want people to know that Satan has offspring, they are among the Jews today, and that this spawn of Satan corrupts the hearts and minds of my Jewish brothers and sisters through the Talmund. And, if you don't consider my analysis impelling, so be it. My service to the Lord exists in providing the truth. I am greatly rewarded for it. Acceptance or denial is your business. (Message edited by Watchman 2 on December 21, 2006) | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1765 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, Sorry -- you are wrong again. If you check the General Preface of your Strong's Exhaustive Concordance you will find: This work, as the title-page indicates, consists of several portions somewhat distinct but mutually related, all having reference to one great object, a thorough verbal index to the Holy Scriptures, as they iexist in the three most important forms now known to British and American readers and scholars, namely, the partly Hebrew and partly Greek original text, and the "Authorized" and "Revised" English Versions. No latin used. No LXX used for the Hebrew. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2426 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
"Yet, you call me a liar -- just because your boyfriend, franklin, likes to make a fool of himself before he analyzes the scriptures". (WM2) "How sad it must be for you".(WM2) No sadness here-just joy unspeakable and full of glory!!!! | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2445 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 75.42.171.14 |
Watchman, I can certainly accept that you see things much differently than 99.9999% of the world and even 99.5% of the christian world regarding Genesis. I am glad not to really care what genesis or the bible say. A good book of parables though. Carry on. | ||
| chesed Intermediate Member Username: chesed Post Number: 218 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 75.42.171.14 |
watchman, I'll join Yaakov offically as a protector of Judaism. You want to call it a corrupted religion, yet it is your religion that is so fragmented. You and the Nazi's can go hang out in hell as far as I am concerned. I'm with Franklin on this one. Merry Christmas, or shall we debate Jesus' fatherhood too in this supposed time of his birth? | ||
| doug Senior Member Username: doug Post Number: 1433 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.127.203.242 |
Jesus was the seed of God, not Adam, who crushed Satan's head fulfilling the prophecy. The seed appears to be speaking of spiritual spiritual. In a perfect enviornment where one takes no life and lives forever knowledge of good and evil and being like God would be associated with giving and taking life, something associated with willfullness. | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2446 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.75.252.89 |
Doug, I guess I must be stupid, but your comment above makes no sense to me what so ever. Maybe that is a good thing. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1766 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
chesed, Why do you link me with the Nazis?? I have just defended the Jews by pointing out that their religion has been infiltrated and corrupted by the Kenites. Who do you think was responsible for having Christ crucified? Well, it was the Kenites that were the Pharisees and Chief Priests at the time [John 8:44]. What do you think the parable of the tares in the field was about? Well, it was about these same Kenites. [Matt. 13:25-38] Why do you think that God still blesses the Jews? Well, they were falsely accused throughout history for having Christ crucified. If you look at the Tanakh, it confirms that Cain and Abel were twins, And she repeated to bring forth brother of him, Havel, and he became, Hevel, one keeping flock and Qayin he was one serving ground. It isn't the Tanakh that is corrupt -- it is yaakov2's interpretation that was amiss. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2429 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
Chesed, Why do you link me with the Nazis?? I have just defended the Jews by pointing out that their religion has been infiltrated and corrupted by the Kenites WELL TELL HER WHO THE KENITES ARE WATCHMAN-THEY ARE THE CERTAIN JEWS(evil seeds of satan and eve) THAT SUPPOSEDLY KILLED CHRIST! | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1767 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
doug, You wrote, The seed appears to be speaking of spiritual spiritual. Not true! See the word 'seed' in Strong's: H2233 zeh'-rah From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time. It is either literally a seed as from a plant/fruit or figuratively posterity. No place for spiritual seed in the interpretation of the scripture. Hence, it was the actual posterity of the serpent [Satan] that bruised Christ's heels [John 8:44] [nails through Christ's feet] and the actual posterity of Eve, Christ, that bruised the serpent's head [defeated Satan]. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1768 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
rachelengland [apologist for franklin], You are mistaken [again] when you write, WELL TELL HER WHO THE KENITES ARE WATCHMAN-THEY ARE THE CERTAIN JEWS Apparently, you were out when school was in while discussing this topic. Kenites are not Jews! Kenites are the offspring of Cain and Jews are the offspring of Judah. Any beginning Bible student would know this. Why don't you try researching a subject before you embarass yourself so often. | ||
| fatherofaking Senior Member Username: fatherofaking Post Number: 1297 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 71.161.77.17 |
the serpents head has yet to be crushed. i believe that is when the antichrist is healed from a mortal wound. rev. 13:3 | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2430 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
WATCHMAN YOU LIE AGAIN-WITH YOUR TWISTED SCRIPTURE!!! They had the same mother therefore they were of jewish decent.. You are so full of craziness -it's getting ridiculous and christians already get a bad wrap as it is! Now see what FO believes- this is how it is with a belief in God and when many have a different interpretation of holy scripture.... (Message edited by rachelengland on December 22, 2006) | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 541 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 67.8.213.220 |
Well, it hardly seems worthwhile to talk to someone that considers me to be Satan or a descendent thereof. you are wrong again [sic: about Strong's being a Christian work]If you check the General Preface of your Strong's Exhaustive Concordance you will find:... Ok, I looked up what Strong's had to say about itself.
In other words, he is a CHRISTIAN scholar.
The King James bible is a CHRISTIAN bible. 1) Watchman, are you aware that Judaism and Christianity are two different religions? 2) Watchman, are you aware that Judaism and Christianity use two different bibles? 3) Watchman, are you aware that Judaism and Christianity use different authoritative sources? 4) Watchman, will you admit that Jewish scholars, that read and speak Hebrew as their native language, know it better than Christian scholars that don't? | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 543 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 67.8.213.220 |
Happy Hanuka Chesed! Please stick to the points of the thread. I once read a statistic somewhere that as soon as those WWII German guys are mentioned, threads have a 96% of never getting back on topic. Watchman's point is silly enough to pursue for a bit. | ||
| fatherofaking Senior Member Username: fatherofaking Post Number: 1298 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 71.161.77.17 |
now i am worried about the concordence myself. i grew up 10 miles from round lake, new york. i hung out there frequently. before i was born it was a place that the rich lived. it is now a place for the poor. i have always had trouble trusting the rich. | ||
| ba2 Advanced Member Username: ba2 Post Number: 747 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 165.189.16.135 |
watchman, I think all scripture has been corrupted, probably pretty much from the beginning. But, even though I am not of the Jewish faith, I'll join Chessed and Yaakov officially as a protector of Judaism too. It just makes plain sense to me that someone that uses Hebrew as part of their culture will have a better understanding of the language than someone who just took a course or two in Hebrew. I sometimes use Strong but I do realize it has its limitations. Stone came from a very biased viewpoint and we need to read it knowing he has that bent. Interestingly, I’m sure you realize that Peter pretty much demanded that all must convert to Judaism before they could be saved. It was Paul, with his big following in the new 1st century Christian church that won that argument. Interesting, the gospel of Peter was not included when the NT was assembled. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1772 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
rachelengland, LOL! You are really messed up in your geneologies. You should actually take some time to read the scriptures instead of playing the Captain's woman on the space fantasy at cultbusters.com.au. Yes, there is a common ancestoral link in Eve. Eve was the mother of the serpent's child, Cain, and Adam's child, Seth. Jacob [Israel] was the direct descendant of Adam through Seth. Eventhough there is a common link in Eve, this fact in no way makes Kenites to be Jews. They are separate races of people [John 8:44, Matt. 13:25-38, Rev. 2:9, 3:9]. If you look at the Bible the tribes are named after the males. There is no mention of the tribe of Eve in the scriptures. So, try getting your understanding of the scriptures from reading and studying [2Tim. 2:15] instead of listening to your biblically illiterate boyfriend, franklin. (Message edited by Watchman 2 on December 22, 2006) | ||
| fatherofaking Senior Member Username: fatherofaking Post Number: 1301 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 71.161.77.17 |
hey yaakov, the source you use for interpreting hebrew, is it avialable online? | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2431 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
Watchman, there isn't anyone on this thread who is agreeing with you- well except your boyfriend Ezekiel. Now take your twisted words and shove off-I have had enough of your snide remarks. Even if Abel and his brother Cain had different fathers(which Genesis 4:1 states they do not) their mother remains the same- so the kenites you have imagined up (studying under the grand ARNOLD MURRAY) are not those who in the Bible are depicted as loving people(Moses father was a Kenite) You are the one living in a fantasy world of mysticsm and fairytales.... | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1773 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
fatherofaking, I believe that God allowing Satan's offspring, the Kenites, to have Christ crucified was justification for God to send Satan and the wicked to the Lake of Fire to perish. Surely, the final act of the crushing of Satan's head occurs in the Lake of Fire. However, Christ's sacrifice made it all happen and it was Christ whom defeated death. In my opinion, Rev. 13:3 is not speaking of the antichrist. The first beast of Rev. 13 is the one world order. You can see from the last part of Rev. 13:2 that the "dragon" gave the beast power. Hence, if the first beast was the antichrist [=Satan -- the 'instead of' Christ], then receiving power from the "dragon" [Satan] would mean that Satan is giving Satan power. This does not make sense. So, I conclude that the first beast is the one world order. It is described as such in Rev. 13:1. In Rev. 13:11, we hear of the beast we know as Satan. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2432 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
btw Watchman 2nd Timothy 2:15 was the first verse I learned at the tender age of 7-you however must of forgotten it and thought it said "Study to show your self approved, RIGHTLY CHANGING the Word of the Lord"! These folks here have proved you wrong again. | ||
| fatherofaking Senior Member Username: fatherofaking Post Number: 1302 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 71.161.77.17 |
not sure why i got into this discussion in the first place. sorry for displaying my ignorance. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1774 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
rachelengland, This is not cultblunders, where you like-minded cultists can have those with differing views silenced. This is Factnet, where, in the arena of discussion, one has the opportunity to present one's argument without fear of expulsion. You have had ample opportunity here and elsewhere at Factnet to prove your theory. All you ever come up with is personal and/or degrading comments. You have never once put a position out there and defended it with scripture. So, why don't you [and take your idiot boyfriend with you] take a hike and go back to your mythical star games at cultblunders. This is planet earth and, when you beam down, you need to come armed with some truth instead of your treacherous lies. You are the queen of snide remarks you worker of iniquity! | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2433 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
 whatever... nor is this the Shepherds Chapel thread(talk about a cult) where anyone who disagrees surely is a Kenite! | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2448 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 75.42.171.14 |
I am constantly amazed at, inspite of it's size, age and idol-like worship, how the bible can be used to justify just about any position and that just about any interpretation of scripture can be validated with other bizarre and twisted interpretations. If there were a god, certainly he would have been responsible for a book that is so misunderstood and such a source of controversy. It's like fighting over what is the correct recipe for brownies. In the end, what does it matter? It's just a tired old book. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1775 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
ba2, I don't think any of us are qualified to offer an opinion on the relative abilities in Hebrew of Dr. Strong or yaakov2's authorities. My comments are only based upon the interpretations thereof and the ability to square such interpretations with the Christian scriptures. Surely, there is nothing in the Christian Bible to suggest that Cain and Abel were born with twin sisters. The debate will go on forever regarding Peter's and Paul's teachings and the cannonizing of the books of the Bible. No argument here. It is the student's diligence to sort out fact from fiction. I agree to a certain extent that there is some corruption in the Christian Bible. This topic is a perfect example. As I pointed out in my analysis of this topic, the first clause of what is currently labeled as Gen. 4:2 belongs with Gen. 4:1. One might question how such a clear mistake could be made in numbering the verses. Well, a little homework would yield that the scriptures were probably numbered at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah after 465 B.C. when permission was given to restore the temple. Certainly, the LXX has the same numbering system and it was commissioned by Alexander around 300 B.C. If one reads the story in Ezra, one sees that the Kenites had already infiltrated the Jewish priesthood. Now, who had motivation to make such a mistake as including the birth of Abel into Gen. 4:2? It would be none other than the Kenites themselves. By numbering the scriptures this way, it gives even the Jewish analyst [as we see here] the mistaken impression that Cain and Abel were not twins. Of course, many Christians are messed up as well regarding this subject. This mistake in numbering causes countless millions of Jews and Christians to wrongly believe that Cain was the son of Adam. This deceit would leave one to believe that there is no offspring of Satan, that it was the Jews that had Christ crucified, and that Jews are evil; whereas, all these things associated with the Jews are false. It was the Kenites that were/are the evil forces behind this. These Kenites happily conceal their identity and allow the true Jews [the good fig -- descendants of Judah] to take the fall. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1776 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
rachelengland, You just can't stop lying. Shame on you! | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2434 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
BW2, I do understand where you are coming from because of your beliefs but we can not continue to allow this book to be used for evil- even if one does not believe in it-one can agree that it should be used to teach only good and moral theology!R | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1777 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, Stop with your misrepresentation! You wrote, Well, it hardly seems worthwhile to talk to someone that considers me to be Satan or a descendent thereof. Did I call you a Kenite? Answer: NO! I was simply indicating that the authorities that you rely upon for your interpretation of Gen. 4:1-2, by way of adding to the scriptures, do, indeed, assist in concealing the Kenites as the offspring of Satan. The wife of Cain [another topic] is easily resolved without adding to the scriptures. I never stated that Dr. Strong was not a Christian. It was you whom erred in claiming that Dr. Strong's translation of the words in the OT were Latin and/or Greek. His translation came directly from the Hebrew text. Your only pertinent question is the last one: 4) Watchman, will you admit that Jewish scholars, that read and speak Hebrew as their native language, know it better than Christian scholars that don't? They may or may not know the language better -- but, it does no good to know the language better when the interpretation of the scriptures results in a screwed-up mess as your authorities provided. The use of Strong's only bolsters my argument -- it does not make it. The word 'again' in Gen. 4:2 could also, in English, be inferred to mean a continuation of the birthing process. The Tanakh verifies the same. | ||
| chesed Intermediate Member Username: chesed Post Number: 219 Registered: 6-2006 Posted From: 66.75.252.89 |
wm, Rachel answered your question for me. You go and say that you've never called Yaakov or me a Kenite, yet you claim that these Kenites live among us. (by the way, my neighbors are Christians) These Kenites pretend to be Jews, right? How do you know who are Kenites and who are not? Ya might as well just assume all Jews are Kenites and continue on with your antisemitic doublespeak. You are a member of a 'religion' that is much discussed on this website dedicated to cults. That says something.... You and Yaakov can discuss the Hebrew, Mr. Strong, etc, all ya'll want, but I have no desire to participate. You're twisted views are the work of a cult. So be it. And yes, my whole opinion is based on the fact that you believe this dogma of Kenites of your religion. Call me small minded if ya want. Franklin, if you so desire the headache, carry on with your debates with them locos. I'm with you in spirit on that. | ||
| getagrip Intermediate Member Username: getagrip Post Number: 395 Registered: 6-2005 Posted From: 72.64.146.249 |
I'm not so sure about Caine's father, but here is some info on his half-brother... In the late 19th century, Kwai Chang Caine was the orphaned son of an American man and a Chinese woman. He was raised in a Shaolin monastery, and was trained by the monks to be a Shaolin master. After becoming a master, however, due to a violent incident in which Caine killed the emperor's nephew, he fled China to escape execution. Caine ended up in the American Old West during which time he discovers that he has a half-brother, Danny. Although it was his intention to find Danny in a way which would escape notice, the demands of his training as a priest in addition to the sense of social responsibility which was instilled within him during his childhood, forced Caine to repeatedly come into the open to fight for justice. He would then leave his new surroundings in a further search for anonymity and security. | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2449 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.75.252.89 |
You have me kind of nervous, now Watchman. My girlfriend is a Jew. How do I know she is not a Kenite? What are some of the signs I should look for? Do I have to worry about her poisoning my food? When she is fixing dinner for the family or doing some other loving thing, are there things I should be looking for? You seem like a Kenite expert so any tips you can give me will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. | ||
| preachers_daughter Intermediate Member Username: preachers_daughter Post Number: 318 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 76.181.167.97 |
Blue, that was funny. If anyone can help you out, in the Kenite department, it is definitely W2. He knows it all. (lol) | ||
| preachers_daughter Intermediate Member Username: preachers_daughter Post Number: 319 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 76.181.167.97 |
Watchman, you are once again wrong, which seems to be the case almost every time you speak. Anyone who knows even the tiniest bit about Judaism knows that a Jew is any person whose MOTHER is a Jew, REGARDLESS OF WHO THEIR FATHER IS, or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism. | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 544 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 67.8.213.220 |
1) Watchman, are you aware that Judaism and Christianity are two different religions? 2) Watchman, are you aware that Judaism and Christianity use two different bibles? 3) Watchman, are you aware that Judaism and Christianity use different authoritative sources? 4) Watchman, will you admit that Jewish scholars, that read and speak Hebrew as their native language, know it better than Christian scholars that don't? Your only pertinent question is the last one: (snip) My comments are only based upon the interpretations thereof and the ability to square such interpretations with the Christian scriptures. Incorrect. All my questions are pertinent. You at least admit that you are talking about the Christian bible, and by extension, the Christian religion. Since I am referring to a different religion and a different bible, we are talking about different subjects that have nothing to do with one another. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1779 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
chesed, I am a stauch defender of Jews for they have been miscast as ones responsible for Christ's crucifixion that was prophesied in Gen. 3:15. Clearly, the Jews were several generations from coming into existence at the time of Gen. 3:15. Hence, you are completely in error when you accuse me of antisemitic doublespeak. Your own ignorance does not give warrant to issue such a claim Yes, you are small minded for making such a false accusation. Your cult claim is unfounded. It could equally apply to you. Yes, the Kenites pretend they are Jews -- the scriptures declare it [Rev. 2:9, 3:9]. Even Louis Farahkan [whom I don't support] made the distinction between the good Jews [true Jews] and the bad/evil Jews [Kenites]. Do all Kenites know they are Kenites? Answer: probably not. Most people don't know their lineage. However, those that follow after their father [progenitor], we can recognize today. God does nothing without a reason. So, when examining the Bood of Genesis, one naturally wonders what is God's purpose in providing some of Cain's lineage [Gen. 4:17-24]. God also tells us the curse placed upon Cain and his offspring [Gen. 4:12]. God also placed a mark on Cain and his offspring [Gen. 4:15]. It is my opinion that such scripture is given so that the Kenites can be recognized. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1780 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
bw2, I anwered your question in my post to chesed. You can see from your girlfriend's fruit [works] whether she is a Kenite or not. Since you are an atheist that believes in evolution [survival of the fittest], a Kenite woman might be a good match for you. Either Jew or Kenite, it shouldn't matter to you. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1781 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
preachers_daughter, As usual, you write without studying the topic. If your theory were correct, these people would not be called Jews, but something after the wives of Judah. Jews, by race, are the offspring of Judah. The Bible names the people of any particular clan/tribe by the males thereof -- not the females. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1782 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, I didn't answer your first three questions because the answers are obvious. Your fourth question was answered within the context of your first three questions. | ||
| preachers_daughter Intermediate Member Username: preachers_daughter Post Number: 320 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 76.181.167.97 |
Watchman, you really need to study up on traditional Judaism. Once again, according to traditional Judaism, a Jew is any person whose MOTHER is a Jew, REGARDLESS OF WHO THEIR FATHER IS, or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1784 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
preachers_daughter, Again, you need to study the scriptures and work on your reading comprehension skills. You are writing about the Jewish tradition today. I was addressing the Holy Scriptures and whom are Jewish people therein. By definition, the Jewish people, by tribe, are the offspring of the MAN named Juday, the son of Jacob. If you do a little research, Jacob also had daughters in addition to his 12 sons. These daughters did not become tribes of Israel. The inheritance of Jacob was given to the sons only as was customary. I'll expect your acknowledgement that you were wrong in accusing me of not writing the truth. | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 545 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 67.8.213.220 |
By definition, the Jewish people, by tribe, are the offspring of the MAN named Juday, the son of Jacob. Does this mean that you don't consider Abraham, Isaac or Jacob to be Jewish? | ||
| shem Intermediate Member Username: shem Post Number: 118 Registered: 11-2006 Posted From: 203.111.236.45 |
If anyone ever comes to an acceptable or agreeable conclusion to this subject - then SO WHAT? Will this somehow enlighten us to the mysteries of the universe? Why so much time and energy is wasted on such futile and useless intellectual (for they are in no way Spiritual) persuits is beyond my understanding. This is not strictly true - I understand the pettiness of the mind (satan) very well! | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4652 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
This is what happens when people detest personal spiritual growth and want to twist Holy Scripture to validate the darkness in their souls. Such as racism and ethnic prejudice. It is a matter of spiritual concern. It is a devious trick of satan to tempt one to pervert the word of God to justify the ugliness in their hearts. The perversions of Genesis 4:1 and Genesis 1:26 are deliberate attempts to justify and promote racist ideologies and ethnic prejudices by the serpent seeders (SC "students") as well as the white supremacists. This is not just nitpicking over who has the true interpretation of scripture. There is no implied or direct racism or ethnic prejudice in the Bible. Yet those who refuse to grow in the spirit promote heresies claim that there is. Why would anyone take a simple, plainly worded verse such as: "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." and claim that satan is the father of Cain? Why? The only reason is because they believe that some Jews are the spawn of Satan. As crazy as it sounds that is what they believe. So as they have no respect for people they have no respect for the word of God. So they pervert the word of God to try to prove that Jews are evil. Rather than change what is wrong in their hearts they change the word of God. Rather than change the word of God they need to change what is wrong within their spirits. This is a spiritual pursuit. Time and energy is not being wasted. It is always difficult to deprogram a mind that has been brainwashed with hatred such as the minds of the serpent seeders. They need to be revealed for the racists and heretics that they are so that they do not suck unsuspecting others into their cult. And that is what factnet is all about. A cult awareness forum. Beware of Shepherd's Chapel! It is a cult! | ||
| bluewater2 Senior Member Username: bluewater2 Post Number: 2450 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.75.252.89 |
"Why would anyone take a simple, plainly worded verse such as: "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." and claim that satan is the father of Cain? Why?" For the same reason that someone would interpret "The only way to the father is but through me" as to mean that you must accept Jesus as the savior and that he died for you sins to get to heaven. To give people that perception that they are somehow special and have a "leg up" on others. As idiotic as the "serpent seed " doctrine appears to me, it seems no more idiotic that the idea that someone could raise from the dead, or that a virgin could bare a child, or the the Red Sea was parted by Moses, etc. Just another fable to promote an agenda. Certainly the Christian group "Shephards Chapel" has a right to their beliefs, as bizarre as they are. | ||
| preachers_daughter Intermediate Member Username: preachers_daughter Post Number: 321 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 76.181.167.97 |
By definition, the Jewish people, by tribe, are the offspring of the MAN named Judah, the son of Jacob. Does this mean that you don't consider Abraham, Isaac or Jacob to be Jewish? Well, of course he doesn't yaakov. If he did, that would really mess up his argument, now wouldn't it.  | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4653 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
Not wanting to go off topic here, which I know is your intent, still you do not believe in an afterlife, no heaven or hell so really what Christ told us about His purpose in living and dying amounts to a hill of beans to you. But it means everything to others. But while we are living in this world the threat of racial and ethnic prejudice is real and white supremacy has always been a threat to peace on this planet. So it boils down here to whether we are to be part of the problem or part of the solution. What causes people to be racist? If they claim biblical scripture then they must be shown that they have been lied to. Because there is no such thing as the spawns of satan living in this world. That is just the racist ravings of a backwoods lunatic. Anybody is free to believe what they want but when it breeds suspicion and hatred of people of other races, ethnic groups or beliefs then it must be spoken against. If these false doctrines are not dealt directly with then next we could have more atrocities against the Jews. More racial tensions. Until we all realize we all came from one original race of humans then there will never be racial accord. And the truth shall set them free from the darkness in their souls. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1786 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
shem, You wrote, SO WHAT? See Rev. 2 and 3. There were 2 out of the 7 types of churches, Smyrna and Philadelphis, that Christ found no fault within. If you examine the 9th verse of each chapter, you will discover why. Both churches taught about the Kenites pretending to be Jews. So, it is important. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1787 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
yaakov2, Strong's defiition of Jew: H3064 yehûdîy yeh-hoo-dee' Patronymic from H3063; a Jehudite (that is, Judaite or Jew), or descendant of Jehudah (that is, Judah): - Jew. Judah was the son of Jacob. Hence, all the lineage from Adam to Jacob, by definition, are not Jews. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1788 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
preachers_daughter, I'm still waiting for your acknowledgement that you were wrong. | ||
| dodge Advanced Member Username: dodge Post Number: 810 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.63.65.36 |
watchman, you suffer from impulsive narcissistic discharge, a trait that you picked up from your guru. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4655 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
Rev. 2: 9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Nope, no mention of Kenites there. Just Jews who are mislead. Rev. 3: 9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. Nope, no mention of kenites there. Just Jews who are mislead. Just like serpent seeders who are mislead by arnold murray. Kenites were a semitic tribe mentioned in the Bible. Never mentioned as the offspring of satan. You are full of it watchman. Stop perverting the word of God. | ||
| preachers_daughter Intermediate Member Username: preachers_daughter Post Number: 322 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 76.181.167.97 |
So, what you are saying watchman, is that one is a Jew because of who their father is, and not their mother? That traditional Judaism is wrong? | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1789 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Rev. 2:9 and 3:9 Strong's definition of 'synagogue', G4864 sunagōgē soon-ag-o-gay' From (the reduplicated form of) G4863; an assemblage of persons; specifically a Jewish “synagogue” (the meeting or the place); by analogy a Christian church: - assembly, congregation, synagogue. There you have it -- Satan's offspring in the end time. See John 8:44, I John 3:12. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1790 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Definition of 'patronymic' from American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd Edition: A name derived from the name of one's father or a paternal ancestor. The current Jewish tradition is just that -- a tradition. Certainly, such tradition is not consistent with the definition of a Jew as set forth in the scriptures. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1791 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
dodge, Impulsive narcissistic discharge -- LOL -- far from it. Good Christians admit when they are wrong and are thankful for being edified. So, I'm just testing p_d and providing her an opportunity to demonstrate that she has some credibility. So, I am being magnanimous despite the fact that she has not availed herself of such opportunities in the past when she was proven wrong. | ||
| preachers_daughter Intermediate Member Username: preachers_daughter Post Number: 323 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 76.181.167.97 |
Well, then watchman, you have another problem with your interpretation. I don't know about the bible you read, but mine teaches that Christ had no earthly father. No earthly "paternal" ancestors (at least not by blood anyway). So, since one is not considered a Jew, through ones Mother (like traditional Judaism teaches) this presents quite a dilemma. Are you saying that Jesus was not a Jew? The Bible tends to speak as if He was. Luke’s affirms that Jesus had a traditional Jewish upbringing. He was circumcised and named on the eighth day after his birth. Forty days after his birth he was “presented” at the Jerusalem Temple in keeping with the Jewish Law. At the age of 12 he made a Passover pilgrimage to the Temple with his parents. John’s Gospel indicates that Jesus made other pilgrimages as an adult in addition to the final pilgrimage that led to his death. That Jesus participated in worship at the synagogue in Nazareth is clear from several Gospel accounts. Mark, Matthew and Luke portray him as reading the Scriptures in public and teaching there. Hmmmmmm....? I will await YOUR acknowledgement of the fact that YOU are incorrect.  | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1792 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Definition of 'patronymic' from American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd Edition: A name derived from the name of one's father or a paternal ancestor. preachers_daughter, please try reading with comprehension -- it will save you some embarassment. | ||
| preachers_daughter Intermediate Member Username: preachers_daughter Post Number: 324 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 76.181.167.97 |
Watchman, do you even know the meaning of paternal? I do. belonging to or inherited from one's father; characteristic of a father related on the father's side How about what good old Webster says. On the fathers side of the family Now, since Christ had no earthly father, what race was he? Was he a Jew? You seem to have gotten yourself into a 'pickle'.  | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1793 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Mary had a father. You have been relying upon man's tradition. I have provided the scriptural reference. So, you are wrong. I am still waiting for your acknowledgement that you are wrong. | ||
| catholic_man Junior Member Username: catholic_man Post Number: 50 Registered: 11-2006 Posted From: 72.161.125.254 |
I just do not see how anyone can derive anything other than the fact that Adam and Eve were Cain's parents. The whole viewpoint otherwise is very laughable. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1794 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
catholic_man, The proof is above. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4658 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
Yeah, well your "proof" is as clear as MUD! | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1795 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
I can't help your lack of intelligence. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4659 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
I do not think it is very intelligent to twist and pervert the word of God for any agenda. Especially when the Bible warns us not to. Intelligence is to understand Genesis 4:1 as exactly as it says. "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." There is nothing in the Bible to refute what it says. Adam is Cain's father. Trying to read something into other scripture verses that you want to read that Adam and Eve had sex with satan but is not there is not only heresy but also perverted! Moses wrote the truth. arnie and satan lie. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1796 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Nothing twisted -- nothing perverted. Everything straight from the Holy Scriptures. Yes, Moses wrote the truth as God dictated it to him -- Cain is not Adam's son. It is those that take one verse, take it out of context, and make a religion out of it [a space cult fantasy in your case], are the ones that corrupt God's wonderful Truth. Your behavior is reprehensible! You should be ashamed of yourself. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4660 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
Yes, your behavior is reprehensible! You should be ashamed of yourself watchman. There is no way you can get a different meaning from Genesis 4:1 out of context or in context of the whole Bible. The Bible is not written that way. You want to rewrite it. That is forbidden! It it what it is. "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." It stands on it's own. No other context needed. For that matter you might as well take Matthew 1 18Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. and claim that Christ is the spawn of satan. Your perversion of God's word is an abomination. The Bible warns you against such. I warn you against such. Stop it! | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1797 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Look at my comprehensive post above. The only certainty that can be derived from Gen. 4:1-2 is that Cain and Abel were twins and that Adam sired one or both of the twins. Of course, we know from Gen. 3:14-16 that Eve is already pregnant from the serpent [Satan]. So, you are the one denying the scriptures. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4661 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
What you call "comprehensive" is just your usually twisting, perverting and claiming something is there when everyone can see that it is not. This is beyond your being illiterate or just plain stupid! You are devious. At this point you are clearly a heretic and a thoroughly brainwashed cult member. Purposely lying and deliberately perverting, polluting the word of God. You reasons for doing so are obvious. You hate jews so you pervert the word of God to try to show that they are the spawn of satan. Just like you can not admit that Adam and Eve are the original mother and father of ALL races and All humanity because you are a racist. So you try to pervert Genesis 1:26 to say something it does not. Ok, you are a racist and a Jew hater. Admit it. But don't screw with the Bible to make yourself feel better about it. That is heresy! Genesis 4:1 and 4:2 clearly state that Cain and Abel are born separately, not as twins. And that Adam is the father of both. Genesis 3:14-16 has nothing to do with Eve being pregnant. Just being tempted by satan. No SEX! Eve is not pregnant until the first time, by Adam only, in Genesis 4:1. There is nothing in those scriptures that support your lies. Or anywhere else in the Bible. You lie, arnie lies and satan lies! The Bible does not support you in your racist lies! Give it up. Nobody buys your crapola! Just the SC "students", Nazis, white supremacists, kkk and aryan nation skinheads believe that satanic garbage. All racists! All heretics! All servants of satan! There is no such thing as the spawn of satan. But the above groups come as close as possible. They serve satan by spreading their hatred, lies and heresy. | ||
| dodge Advanced Member Username: dodge Post Number: 813 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.63.65.36 |
Merry Christmas, Franklin. Merry Christmas, Watchman. Merry Christmas all. My Christmas wish for you, my friends Is not a simple one For I wish you hope and joy and peace Days filled with warmth and sun I wish you love and friendship too Throughout the coming year Lots of laughter and happiness To fill your world with cheer May you count your blessings, one by one And when totaled by the lot May you find all you've been given To be more than what you sought May your journeys be short, your burdens light May your spirit never grow old May all your clouds have silver linings And your rainbows pots of gold I wish this all and so much more May all your dreams come true May you have a Merry Christmas friend And a happy New Year, too .. We wish you a merry Christmas Will. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4663 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
MERRY CHRISTMAS DODGE, WATCHMAN, ALL.... | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1798 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Merry Christmas All! | ||
| doug Senior Member Username: doug Post Number: 1436 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.251.43.57 |
Watchman, Is it possible that any other race or mix of races could be saved by Christ Jesus other than descendants of Judah? If so, who can and who is excluded? Are there any races today that you are sure are the descendants of Judah and of Cain? If so which ones? Also, thank you for pointing out the scripture being about Eve's "seed". I had forgotten it and was applying it to Adam's descendants. I believe that any descendant of Adam will produce descendants that are unable to do other than Adam did and that is why no one can get back into Eden apart from Christ who was able to get back into Eden for two reasons, 1 Because he was not a descendant of Adam 2 Because he did not sin | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1488 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.143.109.32 |
Dr. Savage says, "A 22 for every Jew." With posts like this and the rise of radical Islam one should get prepared, buy some guns. Buy them before the authorities take all guns away. What happened in Nazi Germany will happen again. I would never feel threatened by Jews that arm themselves so they can defend their family against nuts. | ||
| pilgrim Intermediate Member Username: pilgrim Post Number: 334 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 195.93.21.134 |
To everyone, Please read the following bible verse. Revelation 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And read also John 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. We are all equal before God, Jesus Christ died for each one of us. We had all sinned. We can all be saved through Jesus Christ by grace alone. We just need to repent and invite Jesus Christ into our hearts. Adan, Eve, Cain and Abel and each one of us had sinned. We can only be saved through Jesus Christ by grace. Blessings pilgrim | ||
| pilgrim Intermediate Member Username: pilgrim Post Number: 335 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 195.93.21.134 |
To Everyone, Please look in the following websites about Latter Rain Heresies that had unfortunately infiltrated many denominations and look at The Serpent's Seed Teaching this heresy was taught by William Branham Who also taught the Dangerous Heresy of the Manifest Sons of God Doctrine also called Coorporate Manchild or Manchild. You can also read in the following website about William Branham's distorted view of women. Teachings of the [false] prophet William Branham (William Branham The Serpent's Seed September 28, 1958 Branham ... this became a main heresy of the Latter Rain movement, he claimed he too was a” god ... www.letusreason.org/Latrain4.htm The Bible says, “Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived}, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord. (Ge.4:1) He did not say I have gotten a man from Satan, who would know Adam or Branham? Then do a google search on Latter Rain Heresies The Serpent's Seed and learn about all about and the false latter rain doctrines and you will be able to understand and expose these extremely dangerous Latter Rain Heresies. (Message edited by pilgrim on December 25, 2006) | ||
| pilgrim Intermediate Member Username: pilgrim Post Number: 336 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 195.93.21.134 |
The Bible says, “Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord. (Ge.4:1) He did not say I have gotten a man from Satan, who would know Adam or Branham? } | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1799 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
pilgrim, So, according to you, God was the father of Cain as Eve declared.. See my proof above. Satan was Cain's father. | ||
| franklin Senior Member Username: franklin Post Number: 4665 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 76.4.117.127 |
You have no "proof" watchman. Give it up. Your so called "proof" is an outright lie, a total disregard of scripture. Genesis 4:1 plainly, clearly says that ADAM is Cain's father. arnie is a liar. Moses wrote the truth. A child could read Genesis 4:1 and understand that ADAM is Cain's father. | ||
| doug Senior Member Username: doug Post Number: 1439 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.255.91.116 |
Watchman, Is it possible that any other race or mix of races could be saved by Christ Jesus other than descendants of Judah? If so, who can and who is excluded? Are there any races today that you are sure are the descendants of Judah and of Cain? If so which ones? Also, thank you for pointing out the scripture being about Eve's "seed". I had forgotten it and was applying it to Adam's descendants. I believe that any descendant of Adam will produce descendants that are unable to do other than Adam did and that is why no one can get back into Eden apart from Christ who was able to get back into Eden for two reasons, 1 Because he was not a descendant of Adam 2 Because he did not sin Also What is your view on the flood? Local or worldwide? | ||
| dodge Advanced Member Username: dodge Post Number: 814 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.34.124.8 |
watchman, it's obvious to me that Eve was thanking God for the birth of her son, Cain, when she said she had "gotten a man from the lord." I'm with Franklin and Pilgrim in that I think your belief that Satan and Eve had sex resulting in Cain's birth is a matter of Shepherd's Chapel students reading things into Genesis that are simply not there. You get this from your guru, as you do your need to twist and mold Hebrew and Greek words so that they fit into your pre-conceived ideas. In this way, I feel that the students of Pastor Murray are a cult, worshipping the man and in a paranoid mindset towards anyone who criticises them. Look at The Fig Tree Cafe, where your posts were deleted and you were banned, just for suggesting that Pastor Murray was in error about his calculations about the return of Christ in 1981. They circled their wagons, became antagonistic towards you, and banned you for making such comments, even though others came to your defense and said they knew you as a loyal Shepherd's Chapel student. Imagine that, deleting your posts and banning you from a Shepherd's Chapel forum just because you dared questioned the Pastor's credibility. Sounds like the bahavior of a cult to me. | ||
| catholic_man Member Username: catholic_man Post Number: 58 Registered: 11-2006 Posted From: 72.161.125.254 |
It seems obviously clear that 'Adam KNEW his wife'. This is really simple...Adam had sex with Eve and then they had a son named Cain. Why is something so simple being so perverted in these discussions? | ||
| easeltine Senior Member Username: easeltine Post Number: 1489 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 66.245.201.137 |
Satan hates Jews and will do whatever he can to pervert Scriptures and kill Jewish people. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1800 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
doug, You wrote, Is it possible that any other race or mix of races could be saved by Christ Jesus other than descendants of Judah? I apologize if there was anything in my prior writings that gave you the impression that Christ's sacrifice was limited to Jews only. I have never made such a claim. You also wrote, Are there any races today that you are sure are the descendants of Judah and of Cain? If so which ones? By definition, Jews are the direct descendants of Judah, son of Jacob. Kenites, by definition, are the direct descendants of Cain, son of Satan. They are two separate people. I believe that you have made reference to this getting back into Eden thing before. What is your scriptural reference for this belief? | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1801 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
franklin, I provided a thorough analysis that proves that Satan was the father of Cain. What part of it do you not understand? Or, do you still think Moses scribed the verse numbers and punctuation as well? Grow up! | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1802 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
catholic_man, If you would take the time to review my exegesis that was posted on this thread above, you would have your answer. The woman, later to be named Eve, was already pregnant in the Garden of Eden [Gen. 3:14-16]. Adam did not have sex with her until after the two were kicked out of Eden [Gen. 4:1]. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that, since she was already pregnant and Adam didn't do it, someone else had to make her pregnant. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1803 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
dodge, You wrote, it's obvious to me that Eve was thanking God for the birth of her son, Cain, when she said she had "gotten a man from the lord." I've never claimed otherwise -- I was just making a point to the literalists. On the one hand, they claim that Cain was Adam's son just because of the way Gen. 4:1 is written, as if this one scripture is dispositive, eventhough nowhere does the scriptures state the Adam "begat" Cain. If these literalists take part of the scripture literally, they need to take the whole scripture literally as well. Hence, the literalist should have a quandry as to whether God or Adam was the father of Cain. You should talk about cults -- you are an evolutionist! LOL! What in hell does anything scriptural mean to a pronounced atheist as yourself. Obviously, you are looking for revenge due to the fact that I proved evolution false. | ||
| ezekiel_37 Senior Member Username: ezekiel_37 Post Number: 1498 Registered: 8-2005 Posted From: 206.186.79.91 |
I think that tradition teaches us all that Adam is the father of Cain, but if you can leave tradition to the side and just follow the Word, it is clear that Eve is already pregnant in Gen 3, and that she does not KNOW Adam until after that, as watchman has pointed out, outside of the garden. There are 2 family lines in opposition all through out the bible. The line of Adam and the line of Cain. As stated, Cain is not in Adam's stated lineage....and good or bad, first born male children are always mentioned. (see the kings of Israel) It is (SC's contention that) Cain's family ends up crucifying Christ, pretending to be Jews but are not and are of the synagog of Satan. We know that Eve has a seed, and that the Serpent (Devil) has a seed. This word seed means offspring. We also know that they are in opposition to each other, and that the seed of the woman will eventually win. Cain is not in Adam's lineage, Abel is dead and Seth is named. Cain has his very OWN distinct lineage, a lineage of names that are traceable in the Word. Christ spoke of the children of the Devil....and that should be enough proof for you Christians. Cain was of his father the Devil....as Jesus would teach....and positively identify some who denied His message as just that....sons of Satan. A spiritual implication with a literal, physical beginning and end. In His service c | ||
| dodge Advanced Member Username: dodge Post Number: 818 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.63.65.36 |
Watchman, the fact is that I, and many others, believe that your "thorough analysis" is flawed and that the results, hence, are erroneous. I have looked into the matter, have studied SC doctrines and the way they interpret Genesis, have read all of the SC threads here on FactNet; and have come to the conclusion that there is no valid reason why you and your fellow followers of The Great Murray believe that Satan was the father of Cain other than a cult-like faith in your guru. Having said that, you certainly have a right to believe what you do. You don't even have to allow the same for those of us who have different beliefs, those of us who are Buddhists, Hindus, followers of Islam, Jews, Wiccans, Bahais, Confucianists, Jains, Shintoists, Sikhs, Taoists, Neopaganists, Caodists, Damanhurist, Druzes, Eckankars, Gnostics, Gypsies, Hare Krishnas, Lukumis, Macumbas, Mowahhidoons, Native American Spiritualists, Santerists, Satanists, Unitarian Universalists, or Zoroastrian. Go and believe what you want to, and allow us to do the same. If you want to come here every day and tell everyone that Pastor Murray and his "elect" are the only ones who understand the Bible, of course you have the right to do that too. I may not believe what you do, but I will defend to my death your right to utter such hogwash. You have obviously not been reading what I post. I am not an "evolutionist" who does not believe in a "source" of all. I know that you think you proved that Evolutionary Biology is, as you said many times, "bunk:" but that is a reality existing only in your mind. You can believe that as well as anything else you want to. It is your right. The fact that I believe that you are a deluded magalomaniac who is under the influence of your master should not really matter to you...because I also have a right to believe what I do. It is equally as valid as your beliefs. | ||
| yaakov2 Advanced Member Username: yaakov2 Post Number: 553 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.192.99.67 |
Dodge, I agree with you. I stopped asking questions of Watchman because I satisfied my curiosity about his beliefs, not that I agreed with anything he said. However, he has the right to continue to post about his beliefs. | ||
| pilgrim Intermediate Member Username: pilgrim Post Number: 344 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 195.93.21.134 |
The following links show Arnold Murray from Shepherd's Chapel false doctrines, like the heresy of the Serpent Seed. This latter rain false doctrine was also taught by William Branham. http://www.letusreason.org/Poptea4.htm http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/arnoldmurray.html http://www.answers.com/topic/arnold-murray | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1804 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
pilgrim, See my exegesis above under this thread. The proof is there. Satan was Cain's father. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1805 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
dodge, You are correct -- I didn't read your posts in their entirety. The reason is plain and simple -- you are an atheist. An atheist has no business confirming or denying the truth of scripture. You see -- your opinion is disingenuine at best. If one provided the truth, you would do your atheist best to discredit that individual. As long as Christianity can be shown to be a muddled mess, then you have forwarded the cause of atheism. Now, I provided proof that evolution is bunk and your efforts to refute my proof failed miserably. I even accorded you the opportunity several times to acknowledge that you were wrong and evolution is bunk. You never took advantage of any of those opportunities. Hence, you have no credibility. I only need to point out to the others that your efforts to discredit me, having nothing to do with the topic, is just more atheist agenda work. I take your efforts as an acknowledgement that I am correct about this subject. The other religions that you write about are just that -- religions. Christianity is a REALITY. Your efforts, similar to the political left, to equate all religions is a typical atheist/leftist tactic. It is very easy to see through you. | ||
| doug Senior Member Username: doug Post Number: 1440 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.125.88.71 |
Watchman, doug, You wrote, Is it possible that any other race or mix of races could be saved by Christ Jesus other than descendants of Judah? I apologize if there was anything in my prior writings that gave you the impression that Christ's sacrifice was limited to Jews only. I have never made such a claim. Are there any people who you believe or who you believe the bible says can not be saved due to their race? You also wrote, Are there any races today that you are sure are the descendants of Judah and of Cain? If so which ones? By definition, Jews are the direct descendants of Judah, son of Jacob. Kenites, by definition, are the direct descendants of Cain, son of Satan. They are two separate people. Are there any specific people today who you believe are of one or the other race and who if so? What is your view on the flood? Local or worldwide? I believe that you have made reference to this getting back into Eden thing before. What is your scriptural reference for this belief? The tree of life is in the Garden of Eden. Next post | ||
| doug Senior Member Username: doug Post Number: 1441 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.125.88.71 |
THE EXPRESSED IMAGE In the Old Testament man was judged by a tree "of knowledge of good and evil". A cherubim with a sword that goes every way like a flame (time?) guarded man in the likeness of Adam from going back and eating of the tree of life. Then man was judged by a flood. It rained 40 days and nights and a dove and raven were sent up from the ark. There was a rainbow to show that we would not be judged by water any more. Then the children of Israel were elected by God and given the law which, as I see it brought condemnation on everyone but Christ Jesus whose crucifixion was a sign that man would not be judged by the law again. The law, perfected in him, was nailed to the cross in him, agreed to by the ones who were trusted to keep it (but didn't). THE BACKWARD WALK OF CHRIST JESUS Jesus went in reverse through the history in the 5 books of Moses summarized above. The Law First he obeyed the law in the Torah living in submission to his parents. The Flood Then he went back before the law to the flood. In the flood it rained 40 days and nights and a dove and a raven were sent up from the Ark of Noah. Jesus went into the water and the holy spirit descended on him like a dove and he went into the wilderness 40 days and 40 nights. The dove is the holy spirit. The raven is the spirit of Elijah. Elijah was fed by ravens of the brook during the famine. Elijah was to turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers. In proverbs it said the eye that mocks at his father and despises to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out. Jesus said that If you care to believe it John is the Elijah to come. John's baptism has something to do with the raven. (There is also interesting definitions and root word for the word meaning "pitch" on the Ark of Noah that is related to salvation. Pitch (Genesis 6:14) Strong’s 3724 kopher; from 3722; prop. a cover, i.e. (lit.) a village (as covered in); (spec.) bitumen (as used for coating), and the henna plant (as used for dying); fig. a redemption-price:- bribe, camphor, pitch, ransom, satisfaction, sum of money, village. 3722 kaphar; a prim. root; to cover (spec. with bitumen); fig. to expiate or condone, to placate or cancel:- appease, make (an) atonement, cleanse, disannul, forgive, be merciful, pacify, pardon, to pitch, purge (away), put off, (make) reconcile (-liation).) | ||
| doug Senior Member Username: doug Post Number: 1442 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.125.88.71 |
The Garden of Eden Jesus went backward before the flood to the garden of Eden. It says in Deuteronomy 30:6 , Yahweh Elohim (the Lord thy God), "will circumcise your heart and the heart of your seed to love Yahweh Elohim with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, that you may live." In order to live one must eat of the tree of life which is in the garden of Eden being guarded by cherubim with a sword. The Last Supper The last supper of Jesus was the Passover supper where the angel of death passed over all those in the households of Israel when it saw the blood of the lamb on the doorpost. I see the blood as the blood of the circumcised heart (Jesus when his heart was pierced, water and blood came out). On Passover Jesus and his disciples revisit the original scene in Eden and reverse it. Adam is played by Jesus. Eve is played by the disciples. The devil is played by Judas "One of you is a devil" (Jesus) Adam and Eve ate to forget God to become like God. Jesus broke the bread and told his disciples "Eat this in remembrance of me" to remember rather than forget. Since Adam mankind has been using food thinking it is doing something it is not doing. People use food like a drug to dull their conscience or to compensate and feel good when they are not. Temptation Where were Adam and Eve before they ate? They were in a garden being tempted. Remember we are going in reverse Where were Christ and the disciples after they ate? In the garden of Gethsemane during Jesus’ time of temptation. The Bride Adam went back before Eve was formed. Adam was put into a deep sleep and his side was opened and a helps meet was made for him from his side. Christ was put into a deep sleep, death, and his side was opened, and water and blood came out. Also being killed by man under the dominion of Satan putting to death an innocent man who was seed of God and not of Adam, brought judgment on Satan. I believe the bride of Christ is the witness that is said in the NT to be of the spirit, water and blood. The Alpha and Omega The host, army, of heaven was in place before Adam was formed. Christ Jesus takes us to heavenly places but there was a battle in heaven. Christ takes us back to the beginning and where are we? At the end of the scripture the revelation of John the apostle is the description of that battle. REVELATION Of Yourself You Can Do Nothing There was a battle in heaven and in it Satan's people fight for Satan but Jesus fights for his people. All as they can do is seek understanding (standing under), agreeing to truth and be thankful. In the battle the serpent cast a third of the stars to the earth with its tail. This is who I believe the lost are whom Christ came to save. They are lost as in lost sheep, not as in lost sinners. Everyone is a sinner but not everyone is lost. Some people are comfortable and at home in hell, separation from God, Adam's death. They will be comfortable there until hell and death (Adam's death, the first death/the first Adam) are cast into the lake of fire (the second death). I believe that hell is separation from God and if we aren't born into it the moment we are conceived in Adam's death "we all died in Adam" than it sure is a likeness of it. hell will be a place of torment when it is cast into the lake of fire. | ||
| dodge Advanced Member Username: dodge Post Number: 820 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.63.65.36 |
But, Watchman, I’m NOT an atheist. What ever gave you that idea? I was born and raised in a very strict Roman Catholic family, went through twelve years of Catholic School, was a altar boy, and attended seminary following high school. Hence, your opinion that I have “…no business confirming or denying the truth of scripture” lacks credibility. Even if I didn't have the background that I do, I would still have the right to offer my educated opinion. It is you who has no right to be telling anyone here that they should or should not share their opinions. The fact is, you have NOT provided the “truth,” only your opinions based on what I perceive as flawed interpretations of the Old Testament due to your indoctrination in the cult of the Shepherd’s Chapel. That is the truth, and many of us here see that. Your belief that you, single-handedly, proved the discipline of Evolutionary Biology “bunk” is representative of your deluded arrogance. If that were the case, and you have indeed proved evolution to be false, then the graduate schools that award degrees in Evolutionary Biology would be forced to close their doors and you would be on all the talk shows. So far, that hasn’t happened…because you are wrong! The science of Evolutionary Biology is a proven field of study, and the academic community is not impressed with your pathetic claims that are written on an internet forum. Hence, you have no credibility, no authority to claim such grandiose, presumptuous accomplishments as having “debunked the science of evolutionary biology.” You are also in error by saying that I “…equate all religions,” because all I did was list the various spiritual belief systems as an example of the diversity of religious adherence in the world. And you have the audacity to say that you “see through me.” You see nothing, because you are blinded by your indoctrination in the cult of the Pastor, and are unable to really “see.” | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1806 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
dodge, How about that wonderful thread you started under the Evolution topic. dodge Advanced Member Username: dodge Post Number: 562 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.34.124.8 Posted on Thursday, September 21, 2006 - 1:49 am: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My fellow Atheists, I am pleased to report that the 2006 fiscal year was our most successful yet. Not only has Atheism taken tremendous strides all over the world, we are still in complete control of all media (including television, newspapers, radio and the Internet), all corporations, and all governments. Our latest fleet of mind-control satellites, employing the new high-frequency wave emitters that can penetrate tinfoil hats, is now in orbit and fully operational; our black-helicopter-riding paratrooper armies are ready to strike on command; and all our false puppet churches continue to make inroads in luring True Christians away from the flock. (If we have to go to Hell when we die just because we hate God and can't stand the thought of submitting to his judgment, then damn it, we're taking as many people with us as we can!) Our icy cold, multi-tentacled grip is rapidly tightening around the entire Earth, preparing for the time of the Rapture, when all True Christians will be whisked away into Heaven, leaving absolutely nothing between us and our goal of complete world domination!! Best of all, those God-believing theistic fools still don't have any idea that we control everything!!! Muahahahaha!!!! Oh yes -- I loved that one post of yours which told us what you think of the scriptures. Even a pathetic loser atheist pig like you was too ashamed to leave it on the board. You are only here under false pretenses. Beside that, you are a huge liar! Take yourself and your lack of credibility elsewhere. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1807 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
doug, You wrote, Are there any people who you believe or who you believe the bible says can not be saved due to their race? Christ came for all people. Everyone gets one chance to overcome Satan. They get their chance here in the flesh or later in the millennium [Lord's Day]. You wrote, Are there any specific people today who you believe are of one or the other race and who if so? Yes, there are true Jews and true Kenites alive today. Both the good and bad fig are replanted in the country of Israel today. There are true Jews and true Kenites in America as well. You wrote, What is your view on the flood? Local or worldwide? First, Noah's flood is not the Flood mentioned in 2Pet. 3:5-7. That Flood caused all land life to perish. We know that Noah's flood was nowhere close to that Flood. Olive trees survived Noah's flood [Gen. 8:11]. The Gentiles survived Noah's flood [Gen. 10:5]. The Kenites survived Noah's flood [Gen. 15:19]. Plus, it is obvious that there are many races of people with us today, which, by their very existence, is proof that they survived Noah's flood. Physics tells us that, whatever level Noah's flood ultimately achieved, that water level would have permeated the entire planet unless it can be shown that this level could be contained within a rim of mountains. However, the depiction of Noah's flood in the Bible tells us that certain mountains were overtopped [Gen. 8:5]. So, in my opinion, Noah's flood impacted the entire planet. It only reached a level that 1) accomplished the purpose of the flood and 2) didn't kill off olive trees and other plant life. Hence, I put little credence in the location of Noah's ark being on Mt. Ararat in Turkey as purported by many. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 1808 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
doug, Thanks for answering my question regarding your returning to Eden belief. | ||
| ba2 Advanced Member Username: ba2 Post Number: 766 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 165.189.16.135 |
some people have no understanding of sarcasm. | ||
| dodge Advanced Member Username: dodge Post Number: 821 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.63.65.36 |
Well, ba2, more like satire...which was what I was aiming at in that particular post about the "evil atheist conspiracy." I can't believe that Watchman took that seriously. Oh well, perhaps the indoctrination that SC students go through eliminates their sense of humor. Perhaps too much Bible study makes Jack a dull boy. | ||
| rachelengland Senior Member Username: rachelengland Post Number: 2468 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 216.109.192.236 |
Perhaps too much Bible study makes Jack a dull boy. Dodge, They will take anything you say-even as joking and try to put you in a bad light, it's nothing new! At least they didn't pull up the old blow-up doll fiasco(lol) | ||
| doug Senior Member Username: doug Post Number: 1446 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.127.211.254 |
Watchman, Yes, there are true Jews and true Kenites alive today. Both the good and bad fig are replanted in the country of Israel today. There are true Jews and true Kenites in America as well. Not metaphorically but physically who, which specific people, specifically do you believe are Kenites and who are Jews? First, Noah's flood is not the Flood mentioned in 2Pet. 3:5-7 possible perhaps That Flood caused all land life to perish. We know that Noah's flood was nowhere close to that Flood. Olive trees survived Noah's flood [Gen. 8:11]. Or trees survived on higher planes that abated earlier. The Gentiles survived Noah's flood [Gen. 10:5]. This seems to be your best scripture on the issue Gen 10:5 By these were the isles 0339 of the Gentiles 01471 divided in 06504 their lands 0776; every one 0376 after his tongue 03956, after their families 04940, in their nations 01471. 1471 gowy go'-ee rarely (shortened) goy {go'-ee}; apparently from the same root as 1465 (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. 1465 gevah gay-vaw' feminine of 1460; the back, i.e. (by extensive) the person:--body. 1460 gev gave from 1342 (corresponding to 1354); the back; by analogy, the middle:--+ among, back, body. 1342 ga'ah gaw-aw' a primitive root; to mount up; hence, in general, to rise, (figuratively) be majestic:--gloriously, grow up, increase, be risen, triumph. 1354 gab gab from an unused root meaning to hollow or curve; the back (as rounded (Compare 1460 and 1479); by analogy, the top or rim, a boss, a vault, arch of eye, bulwarks, etc.:--back, body, boss, eminent (higher) place, (eye)brows, nave, ring. 1479 guwph goof a primitive root; properly, to hollow or arch, i.e. (figuratively) close; to shut:--shut. The Kenites survived Noah's flood [Gen. 15:19]. Gen 15:19 The Kenites 07017, and the Kenizzites 07074, and the Kadmonites 06935, 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. 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 Pales |
