Moving on to Genius chapter 3

Let me see if I can make this clear: Point being Genesis 1 on the 6th day God said “Let Us make man (a human males and females) in Our image and after our likeness.” In other words they had a head, 2 arms, 2 lags, Etc. What a lot of you are saying is that this was Adam and Eve that brought the different races into the world. Here is why I say it could not have been Adam and Eve created on the 6th day:

I was trying to point out just what the word meant because it has a totally different meaning in the Hebrew than in todays. English.
#5060 in the Strong's Hebrew dictionary: Naga; a prime root properly to touch, i.e. lay the hand upon a woman (for any purpose euphemism to lie with a woman)

If Adam and Eve where the mother and father of every race; then God has changed things because you look at things today; a man and a woman of the same race that you can trace that line back and see that there has been no interracial mixing, it is impossible for them to have children of a different race. You have the exception in skin color once in a while and albino (a black person with white skin) some different color in the skin pigmentation. A white couple cannot have an Oriental, or any other race child than white and it go both ways right down the line. So either the teaching of Adam and Eve creating all the races is wrong or the bible is wrong and God is not God. The bible clearly states that God is unchanging; AND I BELIEVE THE BIBLE.

Are you suggesting that God did not know what choice Adam and Eve would make?

you don't even know what race Adam was.
he could have been purple.
Cain was same Race as Adam, Purple!
you act like the dude was white.
living in a desert in middle of Mediterranean, i doubt many true white people existed.
when we know Jesus was described as dark black [josephus] and Paul was thought to be African Descent, white people were probably extremely rare.

Show me where it says

Ok, since you didn't want to even engage what I posted I looked it up in the Strong's (which isn't scripture btw) and there are other things that word can mean (#5060) there's a little bit more in the book than online but there seems to be many instances of this word being used that aren't sexual, and could not be, that I don't think you are practicing due diligence here. Again, if you want to suggest (or backtrack) that this is the first instance of spiritual adultery in scripture then a discussion could be had but even that's pretty murky.

What about all the other uses that don't fit your theory/assertion/statement?


When I have an outlandish claim that requires some pretty shaky logic and mincing of scripture to get to the conclusion I put it through the wringer and rarely does it have enough relevance to post publicly.

I don't know what you think Strong's is but to me it is only a reference tool if I want to look up a particular scripture and can only remember "holy one" or something. It might be a guide but it has limits man...

I've done some pretty funky stuff looking up Hebrew words in the Strong's and trying to read scripture that way...it doesn't actually work like that but even though you don't know Greek/Hebrew you should be able to read enough articles to figure out "enough" of how it works that what you are extracting from ONE word (that is used in many different ways) is unreasonable without addressing all the holes first.

If you had posted it as a theory I'd be more inclined to step it through and simulate a bit but you haven't so far that I can tell...it comes across as you presenting this like you believe it's true.






Well I don't understand why you have an issue with race evolving...

You might look into microevolution...How did we get a teacup poodle?

Human race evolving based on geographical location and genetics has enough evidence for me personally (and I'm pretty skeptical).


Microevolution happens frequently and it is quite an interesting study.



As an aside, I was pretty disappointed when I came across the "Sons of God saw the daughters of men..." (Genesis 6:2) as referring to the Seth line intermingling with the line of Cain...which does make sense when considering the whole of scripture but is far less fanciful.

I know that what I say does not line up with a lot of church doctrine,

When it comes to race the point that I am trying to make is that God did not create Adam and Eve on the 6th day, and that there is no way that Adam and Eve could have brought forth all the races. As the old Sunday school song says red, yellow, black, and white they are all precious in His sight. Red, yellow, black, and any other color but white (Jewish) were created on the 6th day, and they populated the earth. One day with man is as a thousand years with God, so they had a long time to populate the earth. The bible does not say but I am sure that they intermarried.
I did not use Genesis 6:2 at all. As to the sons of God I have made reference to them back in Genesis 1:1 I the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. We do find "the sons of God" in Job 38. God has a very interesting conversation with Job in that chapter.
Verse3. Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee and answer thou me. Here God tells Job to stand up put on your big boy paints and we are going to talk. Then He asks Job a searers of questions about that first earth age. Verse 7. When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? The morning stars and all the sons of God, this would have included Satan because this was before the overthrow when Stan went from protecting the mercy seat to wanting to overthrow God and sit in the mercy seat. This verse includes every angle, every heavenly being and the spirit of every person that has been or ever will be conceived by woman they may not make it to birth for whatever reason, but they will have been formed in the womb. I will be getting to chapter 6 because it has some very important things in it that are not taught in most churches today just like 99% of what I have said about Genesis 1,2, and 3 up to this point. What you said about being disappointed about the line of Seth and Cain mixing there is more to that than meets the eye.
I know that what I say does not line up with a lot of church doctrine, or the teaching of this preacher or that pastor but it is the word of God. I will always try and read and answer all posts. I would like when someone not just you Mii but any of you to respond with scripture and tell me why you thank I am wrong. I have had people tell me that chapter two is just a recap of chapter 1 but it is just not. They are 2 different chapters, talking about different things and in a different time. Chapter 2 starts with and on the 7th day God rested from all his work period finished everything He wanted to and then He moves on. Into chapter where He forms Adam from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. At the end of chapter 2 God creates Eve from Adams rib. God created them different because He had a different plan of Adam and his offspring.

All the different genetic combinations were present in Adam and Eve. Some are dominant and some recessive. Just because they weren't manifest doesn't mean they weren't present.
A short study of genetics would probably prove helpful to you.

AND I BELIEVE THE BIBLE.

Show me where it says Adam was purple and that Paul was of African decent in the bible. You can't! You use that sarcasm because you do not like what I have said but you can not disprove it from the bible; I am sure that you have learned that in church where the doctrine of men run wild and make void the word of God.

You might look into microevolution...How did we get a teacup poodle?

I was thinking along the same lines, since all modern dogs are descendants of wolves originally.

Yet today two wolves could not mate and produce a poodle any more than two poodles
mating would produce a wolf... and yet that seems to be the idea that Keith is protesting.

Show me where it says Satan had sex with Eve and begat Cain, even though it DOES specifically say ADAM had sex with Eve and begat Cain?

Well I don't understand why you have an issue with race evolving...

You might look into microevolution...How did we get a teacup poodle?

If you are willing to take a lesson in the Hebrew and the Greek, I will gladly show it to you. We will also look at the line of Adam and follow it to see if we find Cain there. Genesis 3:13 The serpent beguiled me, # 5377 this meaning appears only once in the Old Testament, and it is in this verse. Meaning to delude or morally seduce. In other words to have sex with.
Then let's go see what the New Testament has to say. Paul is speaking here so I will take him at his word, I see no reason to question him. 2nd Corinthians 11:2&3 2. For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
Verse 2 Espoused you to one husband: #718 betroth. Paul wants to present the church at Corinth and all the others as a virgin bride to Christ. Verse 3 "As the serpent beguiled Eve: Beguiled #1818 in the Greek Exapataó to seduce wholly.
John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
How is it that Jesus could call these scribes and Pharisees children of the devil or Ye are of your father the devil.
Last thing lets look at Adams line in Genesis 5: And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: Able is not listed because he was killed by his twin brother before he had any children. Where is Cain did God make a mistake and just leave him out.
I may have misspoken I have two more thing that we need to go into, the birth of Caine and Able.
Genesis 4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
And again: we need to look at that word in the Hebrew because it does not translate to good. Again 3254 in the Strong's Hebrew dictionary yacaph A primitive root to add or augment (often adverb to continue to do a thing) What thing did she continue to do? Give birth to a second man child Able.
They were twins.
I want to go back to chapter 3 we looked at the word beguiled but I want to go down to verse 15 this is the very first prophecy in the bible.
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. Between thy seed: There were 2 seed lines in the womb of Eve and they would always be at war with each other.
I hope this will help you understand where I am coming from with this, it all comes from the bible and not my own interoperation.

i said Paul was so black he was mistaken for being AFRICAN/EGYPTIAN:

37 As Paul was about to be brought into the barracks, he said to the tribune, “May I say something to you?” And he said, “Do you know Greek?
38 Are you not the Egyptian, then, who recently stirred up a revolt and led the four thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness?”
39 Paul replied, “I am a Jew, from Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no obscure city.

Paul is asked: Are you not the Egyptian

Paul answers: I am a Jew


Hey Look, KIETHB,
the TRIBUNE is racist like you thinking Paul is some black dude from Egypt!

I did not say Paul was some black dude from Egypt! I said his father was a Roman citizen and his mother a Jew. As far as being a racist you have no idea about my background and the fact that I have grandkids and grate grandkids that are of different races. My clime is and always will be that if you have to people that can trace the gemology back and they are both of one race they cannot have a child of a different race. If that idea is racist, I am guilty as charged.

i read this 3 times and i do absolutely agree with something you have clearly made definitive:
i have not one single doubt that what you speak is absolute truth when you wrote: The serpent beguiled me
he sure did!