Can God die

[Axe]

Gen 6:19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

H1320
bâśâr

From H1319; flesh (from its freshness); by extension body, person; also (by euphemism) the pudenda of a man: - body, [fat, lean] flesh [-ed], kin, [man-] kind, + nakedness, self, skin.

Hi MJ,

My hebrew was a little rusty so I dusted this off and found your translation incomplete.

Flesh
בָּשָׂר
bä·sär'

1) flesh
a) of the body
1) of humans
2) of animals
b) the body itself
c) male organ of generation (euphemism)
d) kindred, blood-relations
e) flesh as frail or erring (man against God)
f) all living things
g) animals
h) mankind
Used - (a) of the flesh of the living body, whether of men or of beasts. Gen 41:2,19
(context)Gen 9:15 And I will remember2142 my covenant1285, which [is] between me and you and every living2416 creature5315 of all flesh1320; and the waters4325 shall no more5750 become a flood3999 to destroy7843 all flesh1320.

And I'm a flood of the whole earth guy; The Scripture and the math supports both that the whole earth was flooded and that only Noah and his family were on the ark.

Genesis 9:19 says that the "whole earth overspread."
This plain declaration (Genesis 10:32) leaves no possibility that any other people survived the worldwide Flood. All the world’s present peoples are descendants of Noah’s three sons and their wives. The gene pool from these six individuals (all originally from Adam and Eve) provided far more than enough genetic variational potential to account for the wide range in national and tribal characteristics which have surfaced since the Flood. The world’s present population of approximately five billion people, likewise, could easily have been developed in approximately 4000 years. An average annual growth rate of 1 2% (only one-fourth the present rate), or an average family size of only 2.5 children per family, could easily accomplish this.

There is a specific Hebrew word for a local flood. The word used in the bible demands that the flood be of global proportions.

Along with:

19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man
22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Scripture indicates only Noah and his family remained. This would not be the case if it was a small local flood.

I also believe that just because The Lord repeated, doesn't mean he made a mistake or is talking about something else.
MANY times in Scripture things are repeated in the very next sentence. If your thesis is true, then in all of those instances
he is referring to something other than what is implied in the first sentence.

Thanks again for the thread.

[Michael Joseph]

Hi MJ,


Flesh
בָּשָׂר
bä·sär'

1) flesh
a) of the body
1) of humans
2) of animals
b) the body itself
c) male organ of generation (euphemism)
d) kindred, blood-relations
e) flesh as frail or erring (man against God)
f) all living things
g) animals
h) mankind
Used - (a) of the flesh of the living body, whether of men or of beasts. Gen 41:2,19
(context)Gen 9:15 And I will remember2142 my covenant1285, which [is] between me and you and every living2416 creature5315 of all flesh1320; and the waters4325 shall no more5750 become a flood3999 to destroy7843 all flesh1320.

And I'm a flood of the whole earth guy; The Scripture and the math supports both that the whole earth was flooded and that only Noah and his family were on the ark.

Genesis 9:19 says that the "whole earth overspread."
This plain declaration (Genesis 10:32) leaves no possibility that any other people survived the worldwide Flood. All the world’s present peoples are descendants of Noah’s three sons and their wives. The gene pool from these six individuals (all originally from Adam and Eve) provided far more than enough genetic variational potential to account for the wide range in national and tribal characteristics which have surfaced since the Flood. The world’s present population of approximately five billion people, likewise, could easily have been developed in approximately 4000 years. An average annual growth rate of 1 2% (only one-fourth the present rate), or an average family size of only 2.5 children per family, could easily accomplish this.

There is a specific Hebrew word for a local flood. The word used in the bible demands that the flood be of global proportions.

Along with:

19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man
22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Scripture indicates only Noah and his family remained. This would not be the case if it was a small local flood.

Axe thank you for your response.

First this:

Gen 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

H8435 - translated in KJV - generations
תּלדה תּולדה
tôledâh tôledâh
to-led-aw', to-led-aw'
From H3205; (plural only) descent, that is, family; (figuratively) history: - birth, generations.


H8549 - translated in KJV perfect
תּמים
tâmı̂ym
taw-meem'
From H8552; entire (literally, figuratively or morally); also (as noun) integrity, truth: - without blemish, complete, full, perfect, sincerely (-ity), sound, without spot, undefiled, upright (-ly), whole.

He could show a perfect lineage back to The Man in the Garden. Notice Noah is said to be Perfect in his Generations in contrast to the beginning of the Chapter 6 - we find Angels coming to Earth and having Sex with women and creating hybrids.

-----

Gen 6:19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

Commentary: Now for the redundancy - It did say two of EVERY sort. I mean we are talking about animals, there are Clean animals too right?

Gen 6:20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

Commentary: Because in verse nineteen apparently Noah must be dense because now Yehovah tells him "hey, were you paying attention, I said take also two of these"....because in v. 19 you must not have understood correctly.

Gen 6:21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

Commentary: Wow look at that "food that is to be eaten" - Noah knew the health laws.

Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

Commentary: Now we got Clean beasts? Come on, now I thought Yehovah said take EVERY flesh on the Ark by two's. I mean clearly flesh is beast right?

H929
behêmâh

From an unused root (probably meaning to be mute); properly a dumb beast; especially any large quadruped or animal (often collectively): - beast, cattle.

cattle can't be flesh. No wait it is flesh. Hmmm.


These are the ones that Eth-ha-aw-dawm named. Farming animals. Because Eth-ha-aw-dawm was a farmer. He was not a hunter or a fisher. Just as Noah was a farmer [husbandman].



Gen 7:3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

Commentary: Well now we got fowls by sevens. I thought there was to be just two of all flesh. Well I guess fowls don't constitute flesh either. But a fowl is an animal right? And if we are to go with the assertion that flesh was an animal - hmmmmm.

So lets check out fowl:

H5775

‛ôph
ofe
From H5774; a bird (as covered with feathers, or rather as covering with wings), often collective: - bird, that flieth, flying, fowl.

Noah must have really been confused : Is it by Two Yehovah or is it by Seven? No, Noah was not confused at all.


Gen 7:3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

Tangent: There is that confusing word again: "Seed". Here God must be talking about doctrine.

H2233
zeh'-rah

From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

Now, Noah must have been really confused.

I cannot substantively debate whether or not the entire globe was flooded or just a small portion of it. I think the latter. As I think the writer intends all of the "known world". Yet I cannot prove it. What I can prove is the waters submerged the land for over ONE WHOLE YEAR. And it takes a long time to grow an olive tree. If it was a global flood well you do the math.

Gen 7:14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.

Commentary: But these in 7:14 did not go in 2x2 did they?


Gen 7:15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.

Commentary: Show me where it says that the animals received the "breath of life". I can only see that Man receives the "breath of life" - Ruach.

----

Regarding 9:19

Overspread does not mean these were Progenitors of the Entire World. That is absurd. What? Am i to now believe that from one race springs all that we have today. Lets be practical.

H5310
נפץ
nâphats
naw-fats'
A primitive root; to dash to pieces, or scatter: - be beaten in sunder, break (in pieces), broken, dash (in pieces), cause to be discharged, dispersed, be overspread, scatter.


The Point of the Flood: Destroy the Hybrids

Gen 7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

Gen 7:23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark

Commentary: I cannot find mention here that this flood is global.


I contend that they that were with Noah were also two of all the races. For it is an Impossibility to have all the races spring from just one. And in fact Noah and his sons and their wives all had Perfect Pedigrees back to Eth-ha-aw-dawm and Chavvah.

And any geneticist who is worth his weight in salt will confirm this FACT. Just like for Evolution to be true it HAS to be an ongoing process. Where are the 1/4, 1/3, 1/2 kinds - show me the mixes of kind. I don't see it.

Did you get your Hebrew from here?

1a1 and 1h do the trick. Thank you. I however do not use this source as it is most times flat out wrong. Rather, I use it sparingly.

but thank you for it. As clearly Just so Noah would be REALLY confused, he said take two of ALL animals [flesh] on board but then take SEVEN of these animals and just so you don't get it wrong don't forget to take two of These animals. A bit of a stretch in my book.


A critical thinker has to consider the parameters of why the flood was necessary. And that was to Kill the hybrids. Again, while I cannot prove it, I maintain the flood was not global but local to the area. Yet if it was global Noah carried all the races on that Ark and he also carried the Seed Line of Eth-ha-aw-dawm and Chavvah - to keep it Pure - all the way to Yehoshuah.

Now if the Purpose of the Flood is to kill ALL of the Giants and the flood was worldwide- please explain Goliath, Og, Sihon and other Giants? Again, I cannot prove my position, thus I have prefaced it with a notice it is my opinion ONLY.

[Michael Joseph]

Let us go now to the Master's Direct Testimony regarding the offspring of the Old Serpent.

This is the Parable

Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:

Mat 13:25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

Mat 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.

Mat 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?

Mat 13:28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?

Mat 13:29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.


This is the Explanation of the Parable - by Yehoshuah - in Private

Mat 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.

Mat 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;

Commentary: The Creation of Eth-ha-aw-dawm, the first Adam and Chavvah - by The Word [Yehoshuah] all things were made.

Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.


So what is this "seed" at Matt 13:38?

G4690
σπέρμα
sperma
sper'-mah
From G4687; somethng sown, that is, seed (including the male “sperm”); by implication offspring; specifically a remnant (figuratively as if kept over for planting): - issue, seed.


But did Yehoshuah come right out and say "Children". Well.......I think he did. Let's go check it out....


G5207
υἱός
uihos
hwee-os'
Apparently a primary word; a “son” (sometimes of animals), used very widely of immediate, remote or figurative kinship: - child, foal, son.


Now, clearly What Yehoshuah REALLY meant here is that these follow some sort of doctrine - thought process - I mean it says that right. I mean Yehoshuah was telling what the Parable meant wasn't he?

Now for someone who would say Yehoshuah was speaking again in a Parable - I soundly reject that assertion- Yehoshuah was with Precision and care explaining the meaning to his Disciples. He spoke to them in private and he uses language that my ten year old can comprehend.

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.

G3789
ὄφις
ophis
of'-is
Probably from G3700 (through the idea of sharpness of vision); a snake, figuratively (as a type of sly cunning) an artful malicious person, especially Satan: - serpent.

-----

I think I have nailed these "tares" quite well - Sons of Cain = Kenites. However, after Yehoshuah - Salvation [the Shua] is open to whomsoever will. Even one who descended from that wicked one. These are NOT farmers - they are cursed from the Land. Lets see what kind of work these do.

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

H7017
קיני קיני
qêynı̂y qı̂ynı̂y
kay-nee', kee-nee'
Patronymic from H7014; a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin: [Cain] - Kenite.

Kajin - Cain, Kenite (-s).

Jabez is a City in Judah. Here we go Yehudah call themselves Jews. But these dwell in and among Yehudah and they too are "residents of Judea" but they are NOT of the house of Yehudah. But they do lie and say they are.

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.

G4864
συναγωγή
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.

G4567
Σατανᾶς
Satanas
sat-an-as'
Of Chaldee origin corresponding to G4566 (with the definite article affixed); the accuser, that is, the devil: - Satan.


That old Serpent.

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.

------

Jer 35:2 Go unto the house of the Rechabites, [a Kenite] and speak unto them, and bring them into the house of the LORD, into one of the chambers, and give them wine to drink.

Jer 35:6 But they said, We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye, nor your sons for ever:

Commentary: Do your work - If you will trace the roots you will find Jonadab means the "greater Yehovah". There is one who wants to sit on the Mercy Seat - he Used to cover it.

Jer 35:7 Neither shall ye build house, nor sow seed, nor plant vineyard, nor have any: but all your days ye shall dwell in tents; that ye may live many days in the land where ye be strangers.

H2233
זרע
zera‛
zeh'-rah
From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

but what's this, in the same verse, do not plant in the ground. Why? They are cursed from the ground - a Mark on Cain and his posterity.

Jer 35:10 But we have dwelt in tents, and have obeyed, and done according to all that Jonadab our father commanded us.

Jer 35:13 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Go and tell the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, Will ye not receive instruction to hearken to my words? saith the LORD.

Jer 35:16 Because the sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have performed the commandment of their father, which he commanded them; but this people hath not hearkened unto me:

Jer 35:19 Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before me for ever.


forever is a bad translation - better until the end of this Flesh Age.

[Anthony Joseph]

Anthony Joseph thank you for your participation.

Regarding this question: Do we know for certaintly how old Cain was when he slayed Abel?

Can and Abel were twins and they reached the Age of Majority at the Same time. Said another way, they reached the Age of Accountability at the Same time. I'd say the Age of Accountability for young boys is approximately 12 - 13.


Regarding this question: How many sons and daughters did Adam and Eve have and when were these children born?

I suppose Chavvah could have had 12 other sons and daughters by the time Cain and Abel reached the Age of Accountability.

Regarding this question: What is the definition of Nod?

Seems like a Name to me. If a land is Named someone had to Name it. But for the Edification of the Reader and mine too:

H5113
נוד
nôd
node
The same as H5112; vagrancy; Nod, the land of Cain: - Nod.

H5112
נד נודּ
nôd nôd
node, node
From H5110; exile: - wandering.

Where ever Cain was he was exiled from the garden. Gee, I wonder why any of Adam's Children would have wanted to leave Paradise in the Garden - talk about stupid.


Regarding This: Cain's wife could have been a sister or a niece since there could have been many decades of "being fruitful" taking place prior to the murder.

I do not accept this as a possibility at this time. For the Law of God, Torah, demands that the Slayer be presented to God the same day as the event took place; The Murderer in cold blood is to be killed immediately [in the flesh] and dispatched to Yehovah. Granted the Law of Nature was in effect at this time and now Law at Sinai.

I will also grant there is no time mentioned between Gen 4:7 and 4:8; But that would have had to be one dumb female to leave the Garden for Cain. Women are smarter than men - and they got Man hands down in regard to language and emotions. I don't see it. This seems to me, at least, to be grasping at straws.

Regarding this question: What does it mean that Cain "knew" his wife?

that is a Hebrewism that is a way of saying he had sex without being explicit. Furthermore to marry in the Biblical sense means they had sex. There is no need for any fancy ceremony that is just traditions of man and commercial process.

-----

Eth-ha-awdawm and Chavvah are kicked out of the Garden of Eden some time after Cain. Therefore, either Cain's wife is the dumbest human being to ever walk the Earth - or there were other Men and Women already existing.

The fact that they were twins doesn't answer the question of what age they were when the murder occurred. Just because you view the age of accountability to be 12-13 doesn't mean that was when Cain decided to murder Abel. It also doesn't tell us how many other sons and daughters were alive at the time and what their ages were. Do you have that information?

You say I am "grasping at straws" and the explanation offered by you is that "Women are smarter than men - and they got Man hands down in regard to language and emotions." That's it? Are you kidding? I sense a little feminist propoganda within that statement; you don't buy into that do you? If that's your argument, it is weak at best.

You say that Cain's wife would have to be the "dumbest human being to ever walk the Earth" in order for her to choose be with her husband wherever he was banished to; could that not be considered loyalty to one's husband rather than stupidity?

If you want to talk stupid, let's talk about the decision to not listen to Almighty God when he commanded Adam and Eve to not eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. That is about the stupidest thing ever done in the history of earth since it turned a perfect and everlasting paradise existence into a daily burdening toil and an eventual death which was avoidable had they just obeyed God to begin with. I see Cain's wife's decision as paling in comparison to that of her mother and father.

Your further assertion that the land of "Nod" must have been settled by "others" since it had "a name" is also reaching. Perhaps it was just a word used to describe the land of wandering. You give no support of the claim that the land must have been settled by "others" other than the assertion that it is named "Nod" and these supposed "foreign settlers" must have named it.

The "straws" are now in your soda.

[Treefarmer]

I am reading the manuscripts that is the basis for whatever translation your bible is.

If you know the Hebrew, is not there ample room in the Hebrew to describe the word Thought or Mind? Answer absolutely.

God must have made a mistake then. Why would he have described what you claim is a thought pattern, as Children? I never have heard tell of a man calling his thoughts Children. Have you? And in parable of the Tares the Seed there is "Sperma". Hmmm...

Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:

G4690
sperma

From G4687; somethng sown, that is, seed (including the male “sperm”); by implication offspring; specifically a remnant (figuratively as if kept over for planting): - issue, seed.


Now, I have never heard thoughts called Sperm

Gen 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.

the woman - chavvah will bring forth the Christ Child; but lets us explore this thought argument a bit in light of this verse.

1. If Snake - I know plenty of women who are not afraid of Snakes.
2. If Snake - I wonder why God did not make man afraid of Snakes.
3. If Devil - I wonder why God did not give Man great hatred against the Devil
4. If Devil - I wonder why God only gave the Woman great hatred against this One.

All four are completely absurd.

.

You've lost me completely Michael Joseph, I have no idea what you are commenting on or what your point may be.
You may be confusing my comments with somebody else's, because I have not mentioned anything about thought patterns or thoughts being children.

When you speak of a first age, are you referring to the Mormon doctrine which teaches that the humans of this world were previously angels and God made them forget their previous state of being for the purpose of some test or experience in this world?

[Axe]

Did you get your Hebrew from here?

No actually I didn't.

<sigh> I haven't the energy to rebut all this tonight.

Suffice it to say that we disagree again. And I do believe the Lord
had to be clear maybe not for Noah but for us. You know, all of mankind
that would only have this book to know him.

Look, it's Occams razor again. So much has to be true for what you say
to be the case. If He meant man, he would have said man. The context
of the entire chapter is the same.

If I find myself with an extra few hours that I have nothing else to do with
I will come back and specifically take your response apart one piece at a time.

I don't know about how fruitful it will be though. I mean, if the Lord saying
"the whole earth" to you doesn't mean "the whole earth" then I don't know what
I could possibly say to help you see things differently.

We disagree. Interesting discussion though. Thank you.

[Michael Joseph]

The fact that they were twins doesn't answer the question of what age they were when the murder occurred. Just because you view the age of accountability to be 12-13 doesn't mean that was when Cain decided to murder Abel. It also doesn't tell us how many other sons and daughters were alive at the time and what their ages were. Do you have that information?

You say I am "grasping at straws" and the explanation offered by you is that "Women are smarter than men - and they got Man hands down in regard to language and emotions." That's it? Are you kidding? I sense a little feminist propoganda within that statement; you don't buy into that do you? If that's your argument, it is weak at best.

You say that Cain's wife would have to be the "dumbest human being to ever walk the Earth" in order for her to choose be with her husband wherever he was banished to; could that not be considered loyalty to one's husband rather than stupidity?

If you want to talk stupid, let's talk about the decision to not listen to Almighty God when he commanded Adam and Eve to not eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. That is about the stupidest thing ever done in the history of earth since it turned a perfect and everlasting paradise existence into a daily burdening toil and an eventual death which was avoidable had they just obeyed God to begin with. I see Cain's wife's decision as paling in comparison to that of her mother and father.

Your further assertion that the land of "Nod" must have been settled by "others" since it had "a name" is also reaching. Perhaps it was just a word used to describe the land of wandering. You give no support of the claim that the land must have been settled by "others" other than the assertion that it is named "Nod" and these supposed "foreign settlers" must have named it.

The "straws" are now in your soda.

To me if I was the "supposed" woman in your assertion, I would have told Cain, Hit the road Jack - nice knowin' you. But that's just me. And the "supposed" woman is not in the manuscripts.

Agreed that we do not exactly know the Age of Accountability; yet they both appeared before the Ever Living at the Same time. Now I have children and I have noticed in my ten year old that she has already started to ask difficult questions. As such, I'd say a child of 12-13 would do it. but then again, maybe I have higher expectations.

If I am to accept that Cain/Abel were 40 somethings before they FIRST started to bring their presentments before Yehovah; well, I just don't buy that.

Agreed it was not smart for those two to disobey the Ever Living. Yet, it really puzzles me why Cain is with his own geneology and Amazingly enough Adam is not in it. That is really Strange, don't you think? My daddy is in my Geneology. And when we see Adam's Geneology Cain is not in his. Now that is really strange to me.

Your taking this personal. Why? I did not accuse you. I speak to this doctrine. I have given numerous cites in Scripture to back my doctrine. Should you like to bring forth Scripture then I would examine it before my Court to see if it holds merit; otherwise; I dismiss with prejudice. Yet there is no need to take things personal. If you want to call me a Son of a @##$ I really don't care. I have brought my offering before this assembly with Numerous cites. So then let the Reader decide for themselves.

Gen 4:9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

Boy I wonder where Cain got an attitude against God like that? I mean to talk to the Ever Living like this?

Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.


1Jn 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.

Commentary: Yep Cain Loved Abel. Wonder where he got all his Love from? Perhaps Adam/Eve and their children? I doubt it. For they at least were with Great Shame. Not Cain - he is downright repugnant with the Ever Living - "Am I my Brother's Keeper?"...

1Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

of is Progeny

G1537

A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): - after, among, X are, at betwixt (-yond), by (the means of), exceedingly, (+ abundantly above), for (-th), from (among, forth, up), + grudgingly, + heartily, X heavenly, X hereby, + very highly, in, . . . ly, (because, by reason) of, off (from), on, out among (from, of), over, since, X thenceforth, through, X unto, X vehemently, with (-out). Often used in composition, with the same general import; often of completion.


Joh 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.

I mean Cain asked Abel to go into the Field and then he Killed him - that is premeditated murder - and then with a repugnant response to Yehovah.

Gen 4:9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

Commentary: What a LIAR - I guess Adam/Eve taught him that. I mean since they walked with God they must have taught him [Cain] to Lie, right?

----

Gen 4:14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.

Who are all of these that Cain is afraid of? I mean According to the Manuscripts there is just Eth-ha-aw-dawm Chavvah? Of course if one compreheds the sixth day creation of the races - he knew with his position/attitude he [Cain] would not be well received.

-----

Gen 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.


I suppose these two verses are out of order. I mean it says Cain left and went to live in the land of Nod. And apparently in those days, cities were built for just two people. Even in my day, that is called a house.

But, yet again, without having to make up all sorts of "others" like sisters and the like....that are not in the manuscripts, Cain went to this land EAST of Eden; and,

THEN he knew his wife. Which meant he had sex with her and I imagine nine months later a baby was born.


If I am to hold on to the dogma that Eth-ha-aw-dawm and Chavvah are only two people alive then I have to create a daughter of Chavvah. Or, at least hold out the possibility. It is not in the manuscripts so I flatly deny it. It does not meet my rules of evidence.

And then into Cain's geneology. Where is Eth-ha-aw-dawm [Adam]?

-----

But no, we know that Eth-ha-aw-dawm passed down the information that he had obtained in his walks with the Ever Living and we Find later Enoch the Seventh from Eth-ha-aw-dawm - gee where is Cain? - A preacher in Righteousness. And Yehovah Loved Enoch so much he took him as Elijah in the Whirlwind and he did not see death of the flesh.

-----

In summation i do not cling to "possibilities". It is in the manuscripts or it is not. And clearly the men and women created on the sixth day are documented [aw-dawm or mankind]. These are Hunters and Fishers. And then there is one created Later [eth-ha-aw-dawm] who is a Husbandman [farmer].

-----

My opinion is based on Evidence as presented that you dear reader can go and check behind me. As per the first post - a Pre 65 Strong's Concordance and a Green's Interlinear are sufficient tools to gain a very strong foundation in the Word. As such, I suggest to the Reader to not trust in ONE single word I have written. Go make up your own mind with your own research. Then come to the table and share - but do be careful and provide your position from the Word itself.

I have strict rules in my court. I hope you do too.

[Michael Joseph]

You've lost me completely Michael Joseph, I have no idea what you are commenting on or what your point may be.
You may be confusing my comments with somebody else's, because I have not mentioned anything about thought patterns or thoughts being children.

When you speak of a first age, are you referring to the Mormon doctrine which teaches that the humans of this world were previously angels and God made them forget their previous state of being for the purpose of some test or experience in this world?

I am not sure you mean by Mormon Doctrine. Yet the Word of God shows with absolute assurance there was an Age before this Flesh Age.

There are actually Three Ages. We are in the Second and there is Yet one to come. And Yes, Yehovah's Word details all three. So perhaps a study of the Ages is appropriate.

Maybe I have posts mixed up. I was told today by someone that what the "seed" represents doctrine. Don't take this personal, but when I respond to a post, I am not responding to you.

I am not your judge. I am responding to the Doctrine and the Ideas that are presented in this arena for consideration.

Is that fair?

[Michael Joseph]

No actually I didn't.

<sigh> I haven't the energy to rebut all this tonight.

Suffice it to say that we disagree again. And I do believe the Lord
had to be clear maybe not for Noah but for us. You know, all of mankind
that would only have this book to know him.

Look, it Occams razor again. So much has to be true for what you say
to be the case. If He meant man, he would have said man. The context
of the entire chapter is the same.

If I find myself with an extra few hours that I have nothing else to do with
I will come back and specifically take your response apart one piece at a time.

I don't know about how fruitful it will be though. I mean, if the Lord saying
"the whole earth" to you doesn't mean "the whole earth" then I don't know what
I could possible say to help you see things differently.

We disagree. Interesting discussion though. Thank you.

Thank you. I told you I cannot prove my opinion. So if you want to try to persuade me fine, yet my opinion stands as mine and mine only and I do not really see it changing because I have forged it thru years of careful study.

Would you consider that the Translations - modern day that is - are lacking? I laugh very hard when one tells me that the KJV is the true Word. No, the KJV is a translation. So if one wants to dig a bit deeper and go to the foundational basis of these modern day translations, then we can discuss what Yehovah meant.

Fact is, the KJV is a very good translation. Yet it has many errors. So I decided one day to put the Translations away. Stop listening to the good pastors and do my own work. It took me a month to read gen 1-6 in Hebrew; but it pays off. Whereas, I used to struggle with Scripture, it flows quite nicely for me and I do not have to make up possibilities for the Word in effort to comprehend.

I found God when I put down this Book and looked up. Then I looked at myself and saw Phi written into my own flesh. I see the Spiral and know, I am Created. I study the Word to gain the "Knowledge of God".

I know my God and my God knows me - its personal, yes? I have broadcast this opinion of mine based on Scripture - multiple cites - and the Reader is Cautioned to do their own work. Accept it or Reject it. To this man it really does not matter. For I am not the judge anyways and my opinion in regard to another mans beliefs matter not before the Ever Living.

Let me say that the foregoing is not an accusation against you Axe or any other reader it is simply the Truth. I sail my own boat and I will be the only one standing before the Ever Living on that day. I don't imagine the good pastor will want to stand in for me? I don't imagine Yehovah would allow that anyways. As such, Let the Reader take Caution to take NO Trust in this man or any other Man's writings.

I have made the foregoing presentments in good faith with the hope that someone will be helped. Yehovah be blessed. As I know all men and women of honor do. So I appreciate all who has engaged this discourse.

Shalom,
mj

[Axe]

Yet, it really puzzles me why Cain is with his own geneology and Amazingly enough Adam is not in it.

Out of curiosity MJ, can you give me the chapter and verse where you are reading Cain's geneology?

Thank You.

Accept it or Reject it.

I'm not in a position to reject it. I know that I don't know everything, which is why I engage with you on this.

It seems you do not share those feelings, (I could be wrong) but nevertheless I do not contribute here because
I think I'm right about everything and am just trying to argue with anyone that disagrees.

I do it because discovery of the truth of God's word is an irresistible compulsion for me, and I know that I can
always learn more. As I have already mentioned, I am VERY careful about what I'll entertain as far as doctrine
if it is radically different from what I currently understand the truth to be.

I love the moment of discovery. That moment when my eyes are opened to a truth that is new to me.

It is because I love it, I know that I am vulnerable to "tickling ears", which is why I'm doubly vigilant about
any such ideas. I have a decent ability to create a case, and anything "new" that gets in at this point has to
go through a very looonngg filter that involves bringing my entire intellect to bear on the complete structure of
any assertions that challenge my spiritual understandings.

I say all that to explain that my discussion is not malicious or arguing for sake of arguing. It is simply a recon
because a "truth" can and will withstand attack from any angle at any time.

You have the right to your opinion, and don't take anything I say as "trying" to convince you of something else.
I challenge it because I want to know the answer myself.