11,143
edits
The Serpent's Seed: Difference between revisions
→A summary of William Branham's view of the Serpent's Seed
| (11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:SSicon.jpg|thumb|right]] | [[File:SSicon.jpg|thumb|right]] | ||
William Branham taught a version of the original sin that was highly unorthodox and which is referred to by his followers as the '''"serpent's seed"''' or '''"serpent seed"''' doctrine. It requires reading into the scripture something that is not evident in a plain reading of the text. | =A summary of William Branham's view of the Serpent's Seed= | ||
William Branham taught a version of the original sin that was highly unorthodox, and which is referred to by his followers as the '''"serpent's seed"''' or '''"serpent seed"''' doctrine. It requires reading into the scripture something that is not evident in a plain reading of the text. William Branham's first pastor was [[Roy Davis]], who was a high ranking member of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). The Serpent's Seed doctrine has clear racist origins. | |||
This doctrine is comprised of the following related beliefs: | This doctrine is comprised of the following related beliefs: | ||
| Line 12: | Line 13: | ||
##Abel was the son of Eve and Adam. | ##Abel was the son of Eve and Adam. | ||
The serpent's seed doctrine is based on a few scriptures that can be used in isolation to support a position that is not supportable when viewed in the context of ALL scripture.<br> | The serpent's seed doctrine is based on a few scriptures that can be used in isolation to support a position that is not supportable when viewed in the context of ALL scripture. This doctrine also requires that you accept a number of beliefs as outlined below that you may not be aware are part of this doctrine. In our view, these beliefs eventually lead to the rejection of the Bible as the true, inspired, word of God. | ||
:''“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness...”<ref>2 Timothy 3:16 (ESV)</ref><br> | |||
<br> | <br> | ||
=Does the New Testament Teach the Serpent's Seed doctrine?= | =Does the New Testament Teach the Serpent's Seed doctrine?= | ||
The New Testament does not support William Branham's doctrine of the Serpent's Seed for the following reasons: | |||
#The New Testament contains no explicit reference to the serpent having sex with Eve. | |||
#Acts 17:26 states that all men sprang from one man, Adam, and not two (Adam and the Serpent). | |||
#2 Cor. 11:2-3 does not state that the serpent had sex with Eve. While it is possible to read that into the text, that is not what the text says. | |||
#Rom. 5:12 tells us that sin entered into the world through Adam, not through Eve. | |||
==2 Corinthians 11:2-3== | ==2 Corinthians 11:2-3== | ||
| Line 33: | Line 43: | ||
:CEB - ''I’m deeply concerned about you with the same concern that God has. As your father, I promised you in marriage to one husband. I promised to present you as an innocent virgin to Christ himself. But I’m afraid that '''your minds might be seduced in the same way as the snake deceived Eve with his devious tricks'''. You might be unable to focus completely on a genuine and innocent commitment to Christ.<ref>Common English Bible (Nashville, TN: Common English Bible, 2011), 2 Co 11:2–3.</ref> | :CEB - ''I’m deeply concerned about you with the same concern that God has. As your father, I promised you in marriage to one husband. I promised to present you as an innocent virgin to Christ himself. But I’m afraid that '''your minds might be seduced in the same way as the snake deceived Eve with his devious tricks'''. You might be unable to focus completely on a genuine and innocent commitment to Christ.<ref>Common English Bible (Nashville, TN: Common English Bible, 2011), 2 Co 11:2–3.</ref> | ||
Does this passage state that the relationship between Eve and Satan was physical? Such an interpretation reads into the text more than it actually says. A common way that scripture is misinterpreted is when we draw wrong conclusions from the text by reading into the text what isn’t there. | Does this passage state that the relationship between Eve and Satan was physical? Such an interpretation reads into the text more than it actually says. A common way that scripture is misinterpreted is when we draw wrong conclusions from the text by reading into the text what isn’t there. What we need to do is draw out from the text only what is there.<ref>James B. Williams and Randolph Shaylor, eds., God’s Word in Our Hands: The Bible Preserved for Us (Greenville, SC; Belfast, Northern Ireland: Ambassador Emerald International, 2003), 366.</ref> | ||
The sole characteristic of the serpent mentioned by Paul is his deviousness. It was by his words that the serpent deceived her in the Genesis account, a point Paul implies in that it is by what the enemies of the Gospel preach that the Corinthians are led astray. This viewpoint is supported in a closely parallel passage where Paul writes of “those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned … By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people … The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet” (Rom 16:17–18, 20). The references in 2 Cor 11:3 and Rom 16:18, 20 to | The sole characteristic of the serpent mentioned by Paul is his deviousness. It was by his words that the serpent deceived her in the Genesis account, a point Paul implies in that it is by what the enemies of the Gospel preach that the Corinthians are led astray. This viewpoint is supported in a closely parallel passage where Paul writes of “those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned … By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people … The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet” (Rom 16:17–18, 20). The references in 2 Cor 11:3 and Rom 16:18, 20 to | ||
| Line 43: | Line 53: | ||
:(3) “deceive” tie both passages back to Genesis 2–3 and to each other. | :(3) “deceive” tie both passages back to Genesis 2–3 and to each other. | ||
Paul sees | Paul sees words — erroneous in content but smooth of delivery — as Satan’s instrument to seduce the church from her loyalty to Christ.<ref>Paul Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997), 501–502. </ref> | ||
==Acts 17:26== | ==Acts 17:26== | ||
| Line 55: | Line 65: | ||
:''And '''He made from one [common origin, one source, one blood] all nations of men''' to settle on the face of the earth, having definitely determined [their] allotted periods of time and the fixed boundaries of their habitation (their settlements, lands, and abodes)... <ref> Acts 17:26 (Amplified Bible, Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation</ref> | :''And '''He made from one [common origin, one source, one blood] all nations of men''' to settle on the face of the earth, having definitely determined [their] allotted periods of time and the fixed boundaries of their habitation (their settlements, lands, and abodes)... <ref> Acts 17:26 (Amplified Bible, Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation</ref> | ||
:'''''From one man''' he made '''every nation living on the entire surface of the | :'''''From one man''' he made '''every nation living on the entire surface of the earth''', and he fixed the limits of their territories and the periods when they would flourish.<ref>David H. Stern, Complete Jewish Bible: An English Version of the Tanakh (Old Testament) and B’rit Hadashah (New Testament), 1st ed. (Clarksville, MD: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1998), Ac 17:26.</ref> | ||
The Serpent seed doctrine requires that a person reject Acts 17:26 because it requires the belief that the serpent injected his blood into the human race. That's 2 bloods, not one. That's two origins not one, and two sources, not one. | The Serpent seed doctrine requires that a person reject Acts 17:26 because it requires the belief that the serpent injected his blood into the human race. That's 2 bloods, not one. That's two origins not one, and two sources, not one. | ||
| Line 71: | Line 81: | ||
==Romans 5:12== | ==Romans 5:12== | ||
Paul said that "as by '''one man''' sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men..."<ref>The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Rom 5:12.</ref> | William Branham stated: | ||
:That’s what You give Adam and Eve, in the garden of Eden, to defeat the enemy. And when Eve reasoned with It, and projected reasons with the Word, it fell apart, and sin entered.<ref>William Branham, 63-0123 - Identification, para. 276</ref> | |||
But Paul said that "as by '''one man''' sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men..."<ref>The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Rom 5:12.</ref> | |||
That one man was Adam, not Cain. Not one woman, not one serpent. One man - Adam. | That one man was Adam, not Cain. Not one woman, not one serpent. One man - Adam. | ||
| Line 81: | Line 95: | ||
If you believe the Serpent's seed is physical, you deny the truth of Romans 5:12 | If you believe the Serpent's seed is physical, you deny the truth of Romans 5:12 | ||
= | =Does the Old Testament Teach the Serpent's Seed doctrine?= | ||
The Old Testament does not support William Branham's doctrine of the Serpent's Seed for the following reasons: | |||
#The Old Testament does not state that the serpent had sex with Eve. | |||
#The doctrine of the Serpent's Seed requires you to believe that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was actually Satan's tree or Satan himself. The Bible does not teach this. | |||
#The Serpent's Seed doctrine requires you to believe that the Bible is incorrect when it states in Gen 3:6 that "the tree was good for food." | |||
#The Serpent's Seed doctrine requires you to believe that Eve committed adultery and sinned against her husband. The Bible does not teach this. | |||
#This teaching requires you to believe that Adam watched his wife have sex with the serpent. | |||
#Gen. 4:1 indicates that Adam did not have sex with his wife until after they were out of the garden. | |||
#The Bible does not state that Cain and Abel were twins with different fathers. | |||
#If Adam's since was also sexual, why was the ground cursed for his sake and not his body? | |||
==Was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil really Satan's Tree?== | ==Was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil really Satan's Tree?== | ||
| Line 157: | Line 176: | ||
Are we to believe that Adam watched his wife and the serpent get it on while he watched? That is effectively what William Branham taught if you read the Bible as it is written. Of course, if the serpent seed doctrine is wrong, then this passage makes a lot more sense. | Are we to believe that Adam watched his wife and the serpent get it on while he watched? That is effectively what William Branham taught if you read the Bible as it is written. Of course, if the serpent seed doctrine is wrong, then this passage makes a lot more sense. | ||
= Was Cain Was The Son of the Serpent?= | ==Was Cain Was The Son of the Serpent?== | ||
Genesis 4:1 is clear that Adam is Cain’s father: | Genesis 4:1 is clear that Adam is Cain’s father: | ||
| Line 270: | Line 289: | ||
:''Then the Lord God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not [n]eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”<ref>Genesis 2:15-16 (KJV)</ref> | :''Then the Lord God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not [n]eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”<ref>Genesis 2:15-16 (KJV)</ref> | ||
=Why wasn't Jesus born of sex?= | |||
A message follower asked the following question: '''Why wasn't Jesus born of sex?''' | A message follower asked the following question: '''Why wasn't Jesus born of sex?''' | ||
| Line 360: | Line 379: | ||
'''He's been doing it from the beginning.''' | '''He's been doing it from the beginning.''' | ||
= | =Did first-century Jews believe the Serpent's Seed doctrine?= | ||
Message believers are quick to point to the fact that there is some Jewish fiction and rabbinical speculation that regarded the fall of Eve as a sexual sin. The suggestion that they cast light on Paul’s reference to Eve and that Paul might at least have had them in mind, since he pictures the Corinthians as a pure virgin who may not be found pure at her presentation to her bridegroom, is a distortion of the text. There is nothing sexy in Paul’s words. Eve was a married woman and not a virgin. The notion of the devil and of devils and evil angels having sexual intercourse with women is monstrous and found its ugliest form in the fiction of the incubus and the succubus in the days of the witchcraft craze. We mention this aberration only because it still appears in books.<ref>R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s First and Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1963), 1239.</ref> | Message believers are quick to point to the fact that there is some Jewish fiction and rabbinical speculation that regarded the fall of Eve as a sexual sin. The suggestion that they cast light on Paul’s reference to Eve and that Paul might at least have had them in mind, since he pictures the Corinthians as a pure virgin who may not be found pure at her presentation to her bridegroom, is a distortion of the text. There is nothing sexy in Paul’s words. Eve was a married woman and not a virgin. The notion of the devil and of devils and evil angels having sexual intercourse with women is monstrous and found its ugliest form in the fiction of the incubus and the succubus in the days of the witchcraft craze. We mention this aberration only because it still appears in books.<ref>R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s First and Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1963), 1239.</ref> | ||
| Line 390: | Line 409: | ||
Second, William Branham mentioned a number of times that Eve was the Tree of Death. This means that the serpent was simply the "can opener" that Satan used to loose his perverted creation, Eve the tree, on innocent Adam. | Second, William Branham mentioned a number of times that Eve was the Tree of Death. This means that the serpent was simply the "can opener" that Satan used to loose his perverted creation, Eve the tree, on innocent Adam. | ||
:''If Life come by Man, death come by the woman. All right, | :''If Life come by Man, death come by the woman. All right, s'''he was the tree of death'''.’’ <ref> William Branham, December 5, 1960, The Ephesian Church Age </ref> | ||
:''Now you can probably well understand what I've been hitting at. By her beauty and her | :''Now you can probably well understand what I've been hitting at. By her beauty and her sex control, '''her shape that was given to her by Satan''', the by-product that Satan did, she is sent to deceive sons of God. And she can sway more of them to hell than any other instrument Satan has got. That's exactly right.'' <ref> William Branham, February, 21, 1965, Marriage and Divorce </ref> | ||
:''"Oh," you say, "she was a tree?" Sure. "Well, they said, 'Thou shall not take of this tree.' God said, in Genesis back there, 'Thou shall not take of this tree.'" Well the woman is the tree. She is the fruit tree. You're the fruit of your mother. The fruit of the womb is you. That's right. And then the fruit of the Tree of Life, that was in the garden of Eden, is Christ. Through the woman come death;'' <ref> William Branham, February, 21, 1965, Marriage and Divorce </ref> | :''"Oh," you say, "she was a tree?" Sure. "Well, they said, ''''Thou shall not take of this tree'''.' God said, in Genesis back there, 'Thou shall not take of this tree.'" Well '''the woman is the tree.''' She is the fruit tree. You're the fruit of your mother. The fruit of the womb is you. That's right. And then the fruit of the Tree of Life, that was in the garden of Eden, is Christ. Through the woman come death;'' <ref> William Branham, February, 21, 1965, Marriage and Divorce </ref> | ||
:''Eve, is Satan's queen. See, Satan, the serpent, got to Eve before Adam got to her. See? That's right. So he beguiled her, see; so Satan, the serpent, was the husband of Eve before Adam ever knew. <ref> William Branham, August 29, 1965, Satan’s Eden </ref> | :''Eve, is Satan's queen. See, Satan, the serpent, got to Eve before Adam got to her. See? That's right. So he beguiled her, see; so '''Satan, the serpent, was the husband of Eve''' before Adam ever knew. <ref> William Branham, August 29, 1965, Satan’s Eden </ref> | ||
:''The other | :'''''The other tree is definitely Satan''' because of what came forth of the fruit of that tree. Now then, we know that both of those trees had a relationship to man or they would never have been placed there.’’ <ref> The Ephesian Church Age Book, William Branham </ref> | ||
So if you are a woman, and you believe William Branham, you are a tree of death. | So if you are a woman, and you believe William Branham, you are a tree of death. | ||