The Serpent's Seed: Difference between revisions

The Serpent's Seed (view source)

Revision as of 05:33, 5 January 2012

206 bytes removed , 12 years ago

no edit summary

Believethesign

Bureaucrats, Administrators

3,880

edits

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 {| class="wikitable"
 !Scripture
-!Text
+!Comments on this scripture
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 3:1
-||The serpent was the most intelligent of all the beasts and could talk which lends support for the contention that the serpent was the 'missing link' in the creation, between apes and man.
+||The serpent was the most intelligent of all the beasts and could talk.
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 3:6-7
-||The result of partaking of the 'fruit' was a knowledge that they were naked, a reference to the sexual nature of the sin.
+||The result of eating the 'fruit' was a knowledge that they were naked, a reference to the sexual nature of the sin.
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 3:13
-||Eve’s claim that the serpent had 'seduced' her.  The term ‘beguiled’ in the King James Version means 'sexually seduced’ or ‘defiled’ rather than ‘deceived’ (which most contemporary translations give).  The original Hebrew word is ‘nasha’ ("naw-shaw") which literally means to lead astray, mentally delude, or morally deceive.  Genesis 3:13 is the only place where it is translated ‘beguiled’.  Elsewhere in the Old Testament the word is usually translated ‘deceive’ or ‘deceived’.
+||Eve’s claim that the serpent had 'seduced' her.  The term ‘beguiled’ in the King James Version means 'sexually seduced’ or ‘defiled’ rather than ‘deceived’ (which most contemporary translations give).  The original Hebrew word is ‘nasha’ ("naw-shaw") which means to lead astray, mentally delude, or morally deceive.  Genesis 3:13 is the only place where it is translated ‘beguiled’.  Elsewhere in the Old Testament the word is usually translated ‘deceive’ or ‘deceived’.
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 3:14
-||The serpent was previously an upright being and only became a 'snake' after it was cursed by God.
+||The serpent was previously an upright being and only took the form of a 'snake' after it was cursed by God.
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 3:16
@@ Line 67: / Line 67: @@
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 4:1-2
-||The failure of the Bible to refer to  Adam 'knowing' his wife again before the birth of Abel meant that Cain and Abel were twins.  This was made possible through the process of [[heteropaternal superfecundation]] where the mother ovulates more than one egg and has more than one partner during her fertile period. One egg is fertilized with sperm from one partner, and the other egg from sperm of the second partner.  Hence, Rev. Branham contended that Cain was the son (or seed) of the serpent and Abel was the son of Adam.
+||The fact that the Bible does not refer to  Adam 'knowing' his wife again before the birth of Abel indicates that Cain and Abel were twins.  This was made possible through the process of [[heteropaternal superfecundation]] where the mother ovulates more than one egg and has more than one partner during her fertile period. One egg is fertilized with sperm from one partner, and the other egg from sperm of the second partner.  Hence, Rev. Branham contended that Cain was the son (or seed) of the serpent and Abel was the son of Adam.
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 4:25
-||Eve does not credit Adam with the fatherhood of Cain.  She does not say God had given her another seed; that would have been Christ, for He was given.  This son, Seth, was appointed instead of Abel.  She recognizes her son that came by Adam; she does not recognize Cain for he came by the serpent. When she says “another seed instead of Abel”, she is saying that Cain was different from Abel, for if they were of the same father she would have had to say, "I have been given some more seed."
+|| In this scripture, Eve recognizes that both Abel and Seth came from Adam.  When Eve says that Seth is “another seed instead of Abel”, she is saying that Cain was different from both Seth and Abel, or else she would have said "I have been given more seed."
 |- valign="top"
 |Proverbs 30:20
-||An unrelated Biblical comparison of the act of sexual intercourse to the act of eating.  This provides support for the partaking of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil as an allegory for sexual intercourse.
+||A Biblical comparison of the act of sexual intercourse is the act of eating.  This provides support for the partaking of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil as an allegory for sexual intercourse.
 |- valign="top"
 |John 1:13
@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 |- valign="top"
 |II Corinthians 11:2-3
-||St. Paul is referring to the church and Eve in terms of chastity.  A woman could be a thief, shoplifter, liar, or any one of many things and still be a virgin;  but a loss of virginity can only come through sexual intercourse.  Rev. Branham held that just as Satan, through the serpent, used perverted seed to create a perverted life (Cain); so Satan now seeks to pervert the Word of God to destroy the virginity of the Bride of Christ (the Church).
+||St. Paul is comparing the church with the chastity of Eve.  A woman could be a thief, shoplifter, liar, or any one of many things and still be a virgin;  but a loss of virginity can only come through sexual intercourse.  Rev. Branham held that just as Satan, through the serpent, used perverted seed to create a perverted life (Cain); so Satan now seeks to pervert the Word of God to destroy the virginity of the Bride of Christ (the Church).
 |- valign="top"
 |Genesis 2:9
-||Rev. Branham held that there is no Biblical indication that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was a physical tree or that its fruit was physical fruit.  Similarly, the tree of life was not a physical tree but rather is an allegory of Christ both in the three times in Genesis (Genesis 2:9, Genesis 3:22, Genesis 3:24) and in the three times it is referred to in the book of Revelation ( '''Revelation 2:7''', Revelation 22:2Revelation 22:14).  This assertion was also referenced to '''John 6:53-57''' where Christ invited his disciples to eat His flesh and drink His blood.
+||Rev. Branham held that there is no Biblical indication that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was a physical tree, or that its fruit was physical fruit.  As a comparison, the tree of life was not a physical tree but is an allegory of Christ when it is mentioned three times in the book of Genesis (Genesis 2:9, Genesis 3:22, Genesis 3:24) and three times in the book of Revelation ( '''Revelation 2:7''', Revelation 22:2Revelation 22:14).
 |- valign="top"
 |Jude 1:14
@@ Line 89: / Line 89: @@
 |-
 |}
+<div style="border-bottom:1px #B87333 solid; text-align:center; font-size:140%; padding:1px; margin:1px;">Eve and the LORD</div>
+Genesis 4:1 says that: ''"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."''  William Branham taught that there was one act of Adam, and two children, whereas when Seth was born, there was one act, and one child.  Genesis 4:25 ''"And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth..."''
+William Branham also taught that people follow the nature of their parents.  Adam was a son of God, and Eve was a daughter of God.  The creation of God could not have any evil in it.  If Cain was the son of Adam and Eve, he would have been righteous like all the other sons of Adam and Eve, from Seth to Noah.  Why was Cain a liar and a murderer?  It was because he was like his father.
 In Genesis 4:1, Eve says of Cain ''"I have gotten a man from the LORD."''  Rev. Branham was of the view that since all life comes from God, and that Eve's statement in itself does not discount the serpent seed doctrine.
@@ Line 94: / Line 101: @@
 :''You could take the orneriest woman in the town, the worst man; if they had a baby, it would have to come from the Lord, because God has laws set together. And these laws, like the sun to raise; you put a cocklebur in a good field, it'll grow. And it has to grow, because it's God's law. When seed is planted, it must grow. And nothing can grow life but God, because it operates under His laws. Therefore when the evil seed was planted in the womb of--of Eve, it had to bring forth, because it's God's law of production. And it could do nothing else but bring it, and it had to come from God.'' ([http://www.nathan.co.za/message.asp?sermonum=1086 Marriage And Divorce, Sunday morning, February 21, 1965, Jeffersonville, Indiana, V-3 N-13] | [http://www.thefreeword.com/books/1365-L.pdf PDF] | [http://www.thefreeword.com/mp3/65-0221M.mp3 MP3])
-Genesis 4:1 says that: ''"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."''  William Branham taught that there was one act of Adam, and two children, whereas when Seth was born, there was one act, and one child.  Genesis 4:25 ''"And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth..."''
-William Branham also taught that people follow the nature of their parents.  Adam was a son of God, and Eve was a daughter of God.  The creation of God could not have any evil in it.  If Cain was the son of Adam and Eve, he would have been righteous like all the other sons of Adam and Eve, from Seth to Noah.  Why was Cain a liar and a murderer?  It was because he was like his father.
+<div style="border-bottom:1px #B87333 solid; text-align:center; font-size:140%; padding:1px; margin:1px;">Serpent's seed and racism</div>
 William Branham was also well aware of the potential racist connections of the doctrine, but preached against aligning these racist interpretations with his teachings.  William Branham also preached and prayed with equal sincerity for people of different races, and was himself a quarter Cherokee.