nephilim
- Thread starter ckhascall
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
(2 Corinthians 11:14) And no marvel; for satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
S
Scribe
Guest
I like the classic interpretation of the literal text. He was of the beasts of the field and probably had powers to mock speech and so hearing one speak would not be all that out of order. Only this one was being manipulated by satan.
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Yes he is identified in Rev. 20:2 as the ancient serpent,Satan,devil https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/20-2.htm and so he was made by God https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/3-1.htm so what about his punishment in Genesis 3:15 what kind of "seed" does he have? https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/3-15.htm
S
Scribe
Guest
That wouldn't make sense though because Cains mother was Eve and his father was Adam and in scripture it states that the SoG saw the DoM when they began to multiply so that would exclude Cain because he was not yet born when the serpent did this in the garden. That would clarify that Cain and the serpent are two separate creations.
I think Eve was in the midst of deception when Cain was born and that deception structured Cain's perception of reality. Maybe that qualifies Cain as Satan's offspring-seed.
S
Scribe
Guest
The seed of the serpent are those that do the will of their father the devil. The sons of God were those that called upon the name of the Lord the seed of the serpent is metaphorical, those who do not resist the sin crouching at the door but let it master them.
It seems that, according tot he wording of the passage, that Eve's deception lasted only a few seconds, or minutes at most, between the serpent speaking to her and her eyes being opened. Cain is not mentioned until the next chapter, long after A & E had been evicted from the garden.
I don't agree with your timing because Eve was not one of the "daughters of men" she is the "Mother of all living" so those daughters of men would be her children. I you consider your last comment it would mean that an angel(Satan) is fathering children with an human(Eve)?
This is not consistent with what you stated of Enoch in post #783 in that you don't see it as cannon. In Jude https://biblehub.com/interlinear/jude/1.htm Jude begins with a series of examples of the same thing your stating now in this post and says the same thing about the "way of Cain" and then quotes Enoch.
When Cain was born Eve said" I have produced a man with God's help."
Cain is named from this statement. From that environment came murder.
contrast that with;
" God has granted another"
From this environment a son in the image of his father is born and a family line of sons in the most high image of God.
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/4-1.htm "Acquired a man from Yahweh" not from the serpent...
I believe the words "I have" were added by translators.
Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said,
I have gotten [Hebrew qanah] a man from the LORD.
In the text, the Hebrew word qanah was translated into I have gotten.
qanah means "to get, acquire".
[quote-Benadam]From this environment a son in the image of his father is born and a family line of sons in the most high image of God.[/QUOTE]
Seth, who was of the believing line descended from Adam, was begotten in the likeness / image of Adam:
Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth
All descendants of Adam were / are begotten in the likeness / image of their parents.
S
Scribe
Guest
Jude may have quoted Enoch to make a point, that is what some think, but others think that the prophecy of Enoch was passed down and was used be the writers of Enoch along with other things the scriptures said about Enoch and filled in their rest of their fable with their vain imaginings. I don't know the answer to that. I believe anyone can read Enoch and discern that it is not inspired or useful, but fables of Greek/Jewish scyncretic sect making up things that the bible does not tell us. Like if someone were to write a fictional novel about Cains life and call it the book of Cain and say that Cain wrote it. 2000 years from now someone would think it was worth including with the library of scripture simply because it was 2000 years old.
If Jude was quoting Enoch to make a point it may be that the false teachers he was lambasting were advocates of the book of Enoch and he was using their own favorite false teachers to rebuke them, much like Paul quoting Epicurean philosophers of Crete to convince those who read them.
Well I suppose we all would see the issue of certain writings differently. As I said before to me it seems clear from the many Apostolic Church fathers that they regarded it as authentic and that as I stated it was accepted by the Jews up until Jesus and then they rejected it to do away with any mention of the Lord. This I based on the references by the early Church (up till about ad250) which are numerous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reception_of_the_book_of_Enoch_in_antiquity_and_Middle_Ages
And so it seems that their opinion of it was considered as to why the Jews accepted it up until Christ but then removed it. Which to them seems to only be that they(the Jews) were trying to reestablish what was considered Scripture and cleanse other writings from the newly formed Jewish cannon that mentioned the Lord. Here is what Tertullium wrote about it in about 200ad (see chapter 3) https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0402.htm I'm not Catholic but I used the web site because it is "arranged conveniently" but you can find another if you like. Anyway this is why I've said the things I have concerning it that being the things the early Church wrote concerning it's removal.
I think that there is not enough information provided in the text to warrant any such conclusions, so no.