It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So Cain is the son of Satan?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
I see this mentioned alot on ATS but they never seem to go in depth. So i did a google search and found this site which helps me clear up some things.

www.biblestudysite.com...

And apparently according to the fellow alot of the bible was mistranslated very badly from the hebrew scripture?

Like i found this verse to be interesting.




6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes*1, and a tree to be desired*2 to make one wise*3, she took*4 of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.






I think you will find that this is certainly no ordinary tree, for it wasn't a tree at all, it was satan. *1 pleasant to the eyes = Hebrew word #2530; chamad: To desire, to covet, to take pleasure in, to delight in, to be desirable, to delight greatly, to desire greatly, desirableness, preciousness.*2 desired = Hebrew word # 8378 ta'avah (tah-av-aw'); from 183 (abbreviated); to yearn for, to lust after (used of bodily appetites) a longing; by implication, a delight (subjectively, satisfaction, objectively, a charm): a desire, a wish, longings of one's heart; lust, an appetite, covetousness (in a bad sense), to covet, to wait longingly. *

3 make one wise = Apple trees don't make you smart. But satan can fill your mind with evil 'wisdom' and evil thoughts! *4 took = Hebrew word # 3947 laqach (law-kakh'); a primitive root; to take (in the widest variety of applications): to take, to lay hold of, to receive, to marry, to take a wife, to take to or for a person, to procure, to get, to take possession of, to select, to choose, to take in marriage, to receive, to accept.


But even i dont know if all of this is fully true because hebrew words seem to always change depending on who is translating it. Anyway hopefully the good folks of ATS can help me out.




posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
cain was Adam's first born
2nd



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Odd question so I'm jumping in...

If Cain was Adams first son... Could that kinda mean that perhaps that's Neanderthal, and able, second son is Cro magnum man? Or maybe I have them backwards...

Let's get racist, so imagine this.... Them Mormons think Cain is the black man.... Now imagine if long ago the defendants of ???? Let's say Steve... We're the Neanderthals, and they were a clumsy bunch... Then they go off and breed.... Years later they meet up with Steve's new kids, Cro magnums.... Family feud over limited resources...

Not so bright Cain kills his brother.... Maybe because of simple brute force.... Well, Steve is pissed.. Can't we all just get along... So he says to his kids, Cain did bad, but it's not your job to punish him...

Years and years go by, and guess who got wiped out.... Except for those who hide in the jungles...

But wait, wasnt man kicked out of the jungle for eating a fruit? ... They evolved and love took over and we humans have breed with each other for so long... Now we have different races because of adaption... Maybe some Japanese people who miscarry because the blood type of the child and mother aren't comparable... Are slightly ahead of the curve... Maybe they grew from a separate branch... Who knows... zebra and horse.

If you are sentient you should respect other sentient life. Rant over.

Religion sure likes to divide. Rant over for realio this time.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by vaelamin
 



And apparently according to the fellow alot of the bible was mistranslated very badly from the hebrew scripture?


Wow? Really? That lie is still tripping people up 6,000 years later??

"Yea, hath God said?.."



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by vaelamin
 


Not in a literal sense. But he had the spirit of Satan in him.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
there are 2 lineages in Genesis, and Cain is not in Adams lineage. 1 from cain and 1 from Adam. Samael or satan seduced Eve in an attempt to spoil God's plan for Man. Eve gave birth to 2 sets of twins.
Able and his twin sister from Adam and Cain and his twin sister, lucifer (lucy) from satan.
I'll get references when I get time.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
No, it can't possibly be true.

This is just too farfetched, sorry. If there is a son of Satain its not him.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by manna2
 



there are 2 lineages in Genesis, and Cain is not in Adams lineage.


Perhaps because the next name on that list isn't a son of Cain?


Adam had quite a few sons and daughters you know.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheXoor
No, it can't possibly be true.

This is just too farfetched, sorry. If there is a son of Satain its not him.


Correct, the "seed of the serpent" is the antichrist. "Seed" is singular in the text, singular and specific.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by manna2
there are 2 lineages in Genesis, and Cain is not in Adams lineage. 1 from cain and 1 from Adam. Samael or satan seduced Eve in an attempt to spoil God's plan for Man. Eve gave birth to 2 sets of twins.
Able and his twin sister from Adam and Cain and his twin sister, lucifer (lucy) from satan.
I'll get references when I get time.


How's this for a reference?

"And Adam knew (boinked) Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD."



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


well this fellow in the link says they were fraternal and born from 2 different seeds.

Also why is cain not mentioned in adams geneology?




25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, “For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.Genesis 4:25


Why doesn't he consider cain his seed aswell? why just abel? mistranslation maybe?
edit on 16-3-2012 by vaelamin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Let me see if I can give you a clearer picture of the verse in question... All my sources come from KJV Bible and Strongs Concordance.

The verse in question, Genesis 3:6 "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."

Let's examine the Hebrew words and what they mean, and try to rephrase this and articulate it a little clearer...

ra'ah, can be translated as "and she is seeing", is the first word used. It is a primitive root; and means to see, literally or figuratively (in numerous applications, direct and implied, transitive, intransitive and causative).

ishshah, can be translated as the woman

kiy or kee, translated to that

Next we have towb or tobe, "good (as an adjective) in the widest sense; used likewise as a noun, both in the masculine and the feminine, the singular and the plural (good, a good or good thing, a good man or woman; the good, goods or good things, good men or women), also as an adverb (well)."

ets or ates, a tree

ma'akal, an eatable or edible thing, translated to for food.

kiy again, translated to "and that"

tah-av-aw, a longinc, or by implication, a delight. Translated to desired, can also mean yearning

huw or hoo, translated to he

ah-yin, to the eyes

chamad, translated to delight in

ets, or ates, tree

saw-kal, to be (causatively, make or act) circumspect and hence, intelligent.

laqach, means to take

per-ee, fruit

aw-kal, to eat (literally or figurativaley)

naw-than, and she is giving

gam, or moreover

eesh, to man of her

'im or eem, adverb or preposition, with (i.e. in conjunction with), in varied applications; specifically, equally with; often with prepositional prefix (and then usually unrepresented in English). Translated in the KJV into: accompanying, against, and, as (X long as), before, beside, by (reason of), for all, from (among, between), in, like, more than, of, (un-)to, with(-al).


aw-kal, to eat.

So, here we go, the verse in question, Genesis 3:6, represented in its equivalent (or as close to equivalent) original Hebrew form, transliterated and translated into modern English....

"Ra'ah ishshah kiy towb ates ma'akal kiy tah-av-aw huw ah-yin chamad ates saw-kal laqach per-ee aw-kal naw-than gam eesh eem aw-kal"


"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."

"The woman saw that the tree had fruit that was good to eat, nice to look at, and desirable for making someone wise. So she took some of the fruit and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. "

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good (suitable, pleasant) for food and that it was delightful to look at, and a tree to be desired in order to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she gave some also to her husband, and he ate."

My opinion of this, is that it's mostly metaphorical. When women and men saw that the tree (evil, sin) was pleasant to look at, experience, and touch, and we desire to satisfy our flesh and become wise in the ways of the world, we hopped right on it and dove head first into sin, as is our fallen human nature.

Satan has this tendency to offer us what we want at the most beneficial time for him. With out taking the time to look for the truth of what we are consuming we get hooked on things we desire at that moment.

Of course, eating from the tree was not beneficial to mankind, but they did it anyways, because they were greedy humans. Just like we know its not good to constantly eat big macs or drink beer or whatever vice it is, we do it anyways because of our sinful nature.

Jesus demonstrated to look to God for guidance before we fulfill our desire. I do not have to look very far to see my own indulgences without considering the truth about the substance.

I hope and pray this helps someone, and may God bless you all. Amen.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by vaelamin
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


well this fellow in the link says they were fraternal and born from 2 different seeds.

Also why is cain not mentioned in adams geneology?




25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, “For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.Genesis 4:25


Why doesn't he consider cain his seed aswell? why just abel? mistranslation maybe?


Read "instead of" as "in place of". And I already addressed why Cain isn't mentioned in Adam's geneology. Because the next name on that list was not a son of Cain. Adam had many sons and daughters.

Example;

Lets assume for argument's sake that I had 10 sons. And a future biographer wanted to talk about my great, great, great, great grandson of my 3rd child, would it make any sense to detail the genealogy of my first son?

Of course not.


edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Confusing.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Iason321
 


Interesting and seems sound. But this kinda proves my point there seems to be many variations to the Hebrew language. I wonder if Satan was the cause of that?



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by vaelamin
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Confusing.


No worries at all, I'm patient. Another approach:

The Genesis author was telling you the genealogy of Seth, not Cain. Even though Seth and Cain had the same parents, they obviously have different offspring. Or another way: Seth was Jesus' super-ancient relative, not his brother Cain.

But forget all that, you're all missing the big picture. That genealogy in Genesis point to Jesus Christ and the Christian gospel. Translate those Hebrew names into their root meanings and see what you get.


edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Ok that much i can understand but what about the serpent? I cant seem to understand why God punished the serpent for something satan did. I mean what choice did that thing have? Man was given dominion over animals so i would assume satan would also have dominion over them right?



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by vaelamin
 


My friend, something I am noticing is that you are reading Genesis and interpreting it literally. You have to understand that Genesis is a metaphorical book, the meanings go much deeper than the text appears at first glance.

Try this website for a explanation: www.solhaam.org...

Also look into: www.biologos.org... and nwcreation.net...

Look into the differences between Old Earth Creatonists viewpoints and interpretations, Theistic Evolutionists viewpoints and interpretations, and also Young Earth Creationists...

My friend, this subject runs deep, and the more you learn, the more you will see how real it is. I hope and pray the Spirit guides you to truth and happiness and peace. Amen



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by vaelamin
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Ok that much i can understand but what about the serpent? I cant seem to understand why God punished the serpent for something satan did. I mean what choice did that thing have? Man was given dominion over animals so i would assume satan would also have dominion over them right?


Okay, forget the stupid serpent, it's ALL ABOUT JESUS. lol

Did you get to those Hebrew root defintions of the names yet?



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


All I can find is the symbols. This language is as mysterious as the lord. Also about your point on the serpent what if i run into a non believer and he asks me this question. Ive seen a few athiests ask the question of why the serpent got punished and i can never answer it. Then its followed by oh God is unjust blah blah blah.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join