Month: April 2017

Having just had the displeasure of listening to a recording of William Finck and Clifton A. Emahiser discussing Finck’s article “The ‘Seed’ of Inheritance, part 1,” I thought it instructive to point out yet another folly in the Serpent Seed of Satan theory as expounded by them.

The recording was basically William Finck reading his article and stopping along the way to note that the White “race” is God’s own creation, that one of our modern day problem is that “our daughters are sleeping with…” let us say, “N” words, etc., etc., etc. It is truly sad that people who claim to be Christians could be so deceived and saturated with hatred. In the meantime, Clifton A. Emahiser could literally barely formulate a cogent sentence and did not have much to say beyond agreeing with Finck.

My previous articles on Emahiser are:
Clifton A. Emahiser’s serpent seed of Satan theory
Clifton A. Emahiser’s “Two Seedline” racism, part 1 of 2
Clifton A. Emahiser’s “Two Seedline” racism, part 2 of 2

Finck knows that he has to search far and wide outside of the Bible so as to find any scrap of ancient apocryphal folklore with which to seek to justify his unjustifiable racism. I will draw your attention to a statement within his article but first, let us consider that which he references for the sake of context.

The apocryphal text 4 Maccabees 18 states the following:

1 O Israelite children, offspring of the seed of Abraham, obey this law and exercise piety in every way, 2 knowing that devout reason is master of all emotions, not only of sufferings from within, but also of those from without. 3 Therefore those who gave over their bodies in suffering for the sake of religion were not only admired by mortals, but also were deemed worthy to share in a divine inheritance.
4 Because of them the nation gained peace, and by reviving observance of the law in the homeland they ravaged the enemy. 5 The tyrant Antiochus was both punished on earth and is being chastised after his death. Since in no way whatever was he able to compel the Israelites to become pagans and to abandon their ancestral customs, he left Jerusalem and marched against the Persians.

Then comes the key point to which Finck will point us:

6 The mother of seven sons expressed also these principles to her children: 7 “I was a pure virgin and did not go outside my father’s house; but I guarded the rib from which woman was made. 8 No seducer corrupted me on a desert plain, nor did the destroyer, the deceitful serpent, defile the purity of my virginity. 9 In the time of my maturity I remained with my husband, and when these sons had grown up their father died. A happy man was he, who lived out his life with good children, and did not have the grief of bereavement.

We will consider the rest of this chapter below.

Now, William Finck wrote that “the cell taken from Adam to create Eve very well may have been taken from one of his ribs.” Well, the Bible tells us that God took a rib from Adam so as to create Eve (Genesis 2:22). He then wrote:

It will be noticed that the Thomson’s Septuagint at Gen. 2:22 states in part, “And God built up the rib, which He took from Adam, into a woman …” [ellipses in Finck’s article]

A further example of this is found in the apocryphal books. For instance, in Brenton’s Septuagint, at 4 Maccabees 18:7-8, we find a woman who is obviously being compared to Eve:
“7 And the righteous mother of the seven children spake also as follows to her offspring: ‘I was a pure virgin, and went not beyond my father’s house; but I took care of the built-up rib. 8 No destroyer of the desert, [or] ravisher of the plain, injured me; nor did the destructive, deceitful, snake, make spoil of my chaste virginity; and I remained with my husband during the period of my prime’.” [emphasis by Finck]

Here is the rest of the chapter:

10 While he was still with you, he taught you the law and the prophets. 11 He read to you about Abel slain by Cain, and Isaac who was offered as a burnt offering, and about Joseph in prison. 12 He told you of the zeal of Phinehas, and he taught you about Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael in the fire. 13 He praised Daniel in the den of the lions and blessed him. 14 He reminded you of the scripture of Isaiah, which says, “Even though you go through the fire, the flame shall not consume you.’ 15 He sang to you songs of the psalmist David, who said, “Many are the afflictions of the righteous.’ 16 He recounted to you Solomon’s proverb, “There is a tree of life for those who do his will.’ 17 He confirmed the query of Ezekiel, “Shall these dry bones live?’ 18 For he did not forget to teach you the song that Moses taught, which says, 19 “I kill and I make alive: this is your life and the length of your days.'”

20 O bitter was that day—and yet not bitter—when that bitter tyrant of the Greeks quenched fire with fire in his cruel caldrons, and in his burning rage brought those seven sons of the daughter of Abraham to the catapult and back again to more tortures, 21 pierced the pupils of their eyes and cut out their tongues, and put them to death with various tortures. 22 For these crimes divine justice pursued and will pursue the accursed tyrant. 23 But the sons of Abraham with their victorious mother are gathered together into the chorus of the fathers, and have received pure and immortal souls from God, 24 to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

So, what has any of this gained William Finck, Clifton A. Emahiser, their racism or the serpent seed of Satan theory in general? Obviously nothing. In their desperation to find any crumb with which to make a loaf that they do not seem to realize that they are appealing to a text for support which discredits their view.

In short, the serpent seed of Satan theory contradicts the Bible (particularly Genesis 4:1) in claiming that Eve had sex with Satan and birthed Cain and sex with Adam and birthed Abel.

This would require Eve to have metaphorically gone beyond her father’s house (with God as her Father and his house being His authority), having had the destructive, deceitful, snake, spoil her chaste virginity and having not remained faithfully with her husband.

Yet, the quotations that William Finck provided us which refer to “a woman who is obviously being compared to Eve” stating the exact, 100%, 180 degree opposite as she “was a pure virgin, and went not beyond my father’s house; but I took care of the built-up rib. No destroyer of the desert, [or] ravisher of the plain, injured me; nor did the destructive, deceitful, snake, make spoil of my chaste virginity; and I remained with my husband during the period of my prime.”

Such “thinking” seems to be in place for those who apparently, “did not like to retain God in their knowledge” so that “God gave them over to a reprobate mind” (Romans 1:28).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page.

Twitter: #SerpentSeed, #ChristianIdentity, #Racism
Facebook: #SerpentSeed, #ChristianIdentity, #Racism

…this GREATEST OF ALL ISSUES, at least some believe that it is the greatest of all issues. The concept of the Two Seedlines…opens up a whole new understanding of what is happening in the world today…Without an understanding of the Two Seedlines, we are at a detrimental loss to know who the enemy is…the “Jews” are devils…a literal Satan spawned physical Seedline…

—Willie Martin

Herein I continue considering Willie Martin’s The Two Seedlines. In this segment I will focus on his specific views about the Jews and race in general within his serpent seedline of Satan theory and his Christian Identity which identifies him as an anti-Semitic racist.
All emphasis in the following quotations are in the original. You can find my articles on Martin here.

Willie Martin writes, “Sure, the Arabs can claim Abraham as their father” which is interesting as they do so via Abraham’s son Ishmael which is his offspring via his what? His concubine Hagar.

He continues by claiming:

We know, also, that the “Jews” of Messiah’s day had absorbed Edomite blood, and therefore could claim both Abraham and Isaac as their fathers. The Shelanite-Judahites could even claim an affinity with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Judah, but that doesn’t make them of the True Tribe of Judah. Now let’s read that passage with that in mind: “They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Yahshua saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.”

Verse 39 really clears up the whole matter. “The Holy Bible New Century Version,” puts it very nicely in verse 39: “They answered, ‘Our father is Abraham.’ Jesus said, ‘If you were really Abraham’s children, you would do the things Abraham did.’”

Martin does not seem to realize that he provided us the actual and biblical answer and reinforced via that New Century Version translation.

What Martin never seems to get around to quoting is that John 8:37 records Jesus telling the Jews, “I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.” Thus, Jesus affirms that this is not, I repeat not, about genetics but about actions.
Abraham is their genetic father but just as there is a circumcision of the flesh, there is a circumcision of the heart. Thus, one could be circumcised physically but not circumcised spiritually. So, they are Abraham’s genetic offspring but/and if they were really so they would “do the things Abraham did.”

And this is the key to the whole issue of two seedlines. Christian Identity serpent seedline of Satan theorists constantly write about “two seedliners” such as themselves versus “anti-seedliners” or “one seedlines.” However, for example, I am a “two seedliners” but not as per their theory but as per the Bible’s teachings.
Biblically there are two seedlines but they are not based on genetics but rather on actions. Thus, the serpent’s seed commit sinful Satanic actions and the woman’s seed commit righteous Godly actions. The good news is that since this is about actions and not about genetics, those finding themselves within Satan’s seedline can repent.

Martin also appeals to Commentary On The Holy Bible, Rev. J.R. Dummelow M.A., ed., which comments thusly, “Their desire to kill Christ, the promised seed of Abraham, proved that they were not children of Abraham, but Satan.” Yet, we can biblically understand that this comment is contextually about that which they were doing and not about their genetics which Jesus affirmed are Abrahamic.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page.

Twitter: #Seedlines, #ChristianIdentity, #antiSemitism
Facebook: #Seedlines, #ChristianIdentity, #antiSemitism

Social networks:
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Archive video site
Ken Ammi’s Product Reviews
My CafePress shop
Google +

Norm Geisler references TrueFreethinker.com:
Apologeticspress.com’s Kyle Butt references TrueFreethinker.com:

Read the article about which Gary Habermas, PhD (Distinguished Research Professor & Chair of the Department of Philosophy at Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary) said, “I have hung on to it since you sent it, & plan to keep doing so”: Historical Jesus – Two Centuries Worth of Citations.

FYI: I just had an article published in the Midwest Christian Outreach (MCOI) Christian Apologetics Journal.

You will find it within the journal on p. 8, it is titled “Serpent Seed of Satan,” see here. (Note that in my bio the put the wrong URL as my homepage is this one truefreethinker.com)

You can also view it as its own webpage here.

Find all of my articles on the serpent see of Satan issue here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, on my Google+ page and/or the “Share/Save” button below the tags.

So called “Christian Identity” misidentifies the white “race” as being offspring of the “lost tribes” of Israel. This claim is coupled with the claim that there is a difference between Jews and Israelites. Some Identity preachers incorporate the serpent seed of Satan theory into their systemization of Identity.

Christian Identity traces its conceptual history to British Israelism which sprung up in the 19th century AD.
Following is a rough sketch of key personages, beginning with a man who is generally pointed to as the originator of British Israelism.

Richard Brothers (1759-1824 AD) was a millenarian prophet active in the 1790s AD who published “A Revealed Knowledge of the Prophecies and Times” (1794-95 AD) which is a two-part book that claims that Britons and other Northern Europeans are “invisible” Jews of the lost tribes of Israel. He was eventually confined to an asylum.

Daniel Parker (1781-1844 AD) was a preacher who published the pamphlet “View of the Two Seeds” according to which the two seed—God’s and Satan’s—are the elect and the non-elect who are “enemies to God, from the nature of their father the Devil, pursing his lusts with enmity against the Elect seed.” He did not specify that the Jews, in general are the non-elect seed of Satan.

John Wilson (1788-1870 AD) was a Scotsman who was a phrenologist: a psychological theory or analytical method based on the belief that certain mental faculties and character traits are indicated by the configurations of the skull. He wrote the “first coherent exposition” about the Anglo-Saxons being the offspring of lost tribes of Israel. He published his ideas in “Our Israelitish Origin” (1840 AD).

Edward Hine (1825-1891 AD) once managed a penny bank in London and became a publisher of pamphlets that promulgated British Israelism. He also published a book titled, “Forty-seven Identifications of the British Nation with the Lost Tribes of Israel” (1874 AD)

Joseph Williams (1826-1882 AD) was a Briton who preached in America who edited the (short-lived) publications “The Trio” and “The Trumpet of Israel.”

Joseph Wild (1834-1908 AD) was another Briton who preached in America where he preached some 130 sermons at the Union Congregational Church of Brooklyn.

George W Greenwood (1836-1898 AD) took over for Wild and edited a monthly publication titled, “Heir of the World.” He also found the Church of the Brethren.

Other preachers who published books on the subject were William H. Poole, Elihu P. Ingersoll, George 0. Barnes and Matthew M. Eshelman.

Russell Kelso Carter (1849-1928 AD) has been identified as the first Anglo-Israelite in the USA to speculate that Cain was Satan’s son as elucidated by him in “The Tree of Knowledge” wherein he wrote that Eve’ sin was brought about by “the tremendous pull of the sexual appetite, aroused by the excited state of the woman.”

Charles A. L. Totten (1851-1908 AD) was a military science professor at Yale University and was viewed as the most influential Anglo-Israelism expositor by combining it with Anglo-Saxonism which was a secular theory premised upon the idea that Anglo-Saxons were to rule the world.

His works influenced John H. Allen (founder of the Church of God-Holiness), Charles Parham (founder of the Apostolic Faith Movement), Victor Morris Tyler (industrialist editor of “Our Race Quarterly”), Reuben H. Sawyer (preacher with the Christian Church who recruited for the Ku Klux Klan) and Alan A. Beauchamp (publisher of the “Watchman of Israel”).

William J. Cameron (1879-1953 AD) became editor of Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent. He also published a series of anti-Jewish articles came to be titled The International Jew. Eventually, Rand appointed Cameron to head the Anglo-Saxon Federation of America.

Conrad Gaard (1892-1969 AD) pastored the Christian Chapel Church, wrote “Spotlight on the Great Conspiracy.”

Howard B. Rand (1899-1991 AD) founded the Anglo-Saxon Federation of America. With backing from William J. Cameron and Clarence Warner (1882-1949 AD), Rand published a monthly titled “Destiny.”

Bertrand Lewis Comparet (1901-1983 AD) founded the Identity organization Your Heritage and preached a sermon titled “What Happened to Cain?” another titled “The Cain-Satanic Seed Line” and authored the book “Gospel of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ.”

William M. Branhan (1909-1965 AD, about who I wrote in the article On William Branham’s sermon “The Serpent’s Seed”) developed the “two seed-in-the-spirit predestination doctrine” which claims that the “humanoid, pre-reptilian” “missing link” was possessed by Satan and that Satan had sex with Eve via the missing link.
Braham identified Satan’s seed in very general terms as being various leaders, intellectuals and establishers of corrupt Christian denominations.

Charles Conley Lynch (aka Connie and Conrad, 1912-1972 AD) was an instigator for the KKK and recruiter for the National States Rights Party-NSRP.

Wesley A. Swift (1913-1970 AD) was a preacher, Ku Klux Klan recruiter who became the “best known advocate” of Christian Identity and founded the Church of Jesus Christ Christian.
See my separate article, Wesley A. Swift – Jews as serpent seed of Satan, the KKK and pre-Adamic race.

William Potter Gale (1917-1988 AD) headed Posse Comitatus and wrote of the serpent seed of Satan in the booklet “The Faith of Our Fathers.”

Oren Polito was a neo-Nazi Identity preacher.

Neuman Britton was an NSPR recruiter.

Richard G. Butler (1918-2004 AD) was the National Director of the Christian Defense League, leader of the Church of Jesus Christ Christian and founded the Aryan Nations and emphasized the bloodline / seedline concept within their statement of beliefs.

Nord W. Davis, Jr. (1931-1997 AD) headed Northpoint Tactical Teams and wrote a book titled “Star Wars.”

James Konrad Warner (aka Jim Warner born 1939 AD) directed the Christian Defense League, served as an officer for the George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party-ANP, edited the official (racist) National States Rights Party publication, the “Thunderbolt,” ran the anti-Jewish and racist literature mail order Sons of Liberty, founded the New Christian Crusade Church, founded the “Christian Vanguard” which was an anti-Semitic periodical, he worked with David Duke’s sect of the KKK, organized the Christian Defense League’s “action arm” and edited the CDL’s “Report” which was yet another anti-Semitic publication.

As noted; in one way or another, British Israelism, Anglo-Israelism, Anglo-Saxonism and the serpent seed of Satan theory have influenced the KKK, neo-Nazis, racist Skinheads and various groups such as Posse Comitatus and Aryan Nations.

Dan Gayman was a high school principal who now heads the Church of Israel. He had previously founded the Church of Our Christian Heritage which was affiliated with the National Emancipation of Our White Seed group that is headed by Buddy Tucker.
See my separate article, Dan Gayman – Jews as serpent seed of Satan.

Philip E. J. Monson, headed the Anglo-Saxon Federation of America and is credited as having incorporated the serpent seed of Satan theory into the modern Christian Identity movement—beginning in the 1930s AD, he published “Satan’s Seat: The Enemy of Our Race” and correlated the serpent seed of Satan with the actions of the Catholic Church with the Pope being the “Prime Minister of the Devil.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Source:

Historical info gleaned from Jon F. Schamber and Scott R. Stroud paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association, “Mystical Anti-Semitism and the Christian Identity Movement: A Narrative Criticism of Dan Gayman’s ‘The Two Seeds of Genesis 3:15,’” November 9, 2000 AD

By now we know that the latest reason—read excuse—for murder, riots, destruction, etc. did not have anything to do with celebrating 9/11—wink, wink, nudge, nudge—no, no, no, banish the thought; it was ignited by a movie about Muhammad the trailer for which was posted to YouTube.

The trailer for the movie The Innocence of Muslims had been on YouTube for 2 months prior to the premeditated attacks.

So what is it that no one is saying about the movie? Let us get to that after some background.

Social networks:
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Archive video site
Ken Ammi’s Product Reviews
My CafePress shop
Google +

Norm Geisler references TrueFreethinker.com:
Apologeticspress.com’s Kyle Butt references TrueFreethinker.com:

Read the article about which Gary Habermas, PhD (Distinguished Research Professor & Chair of the Department of Philosophy at Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary) said, “I have hung on to it since you sent it, & plan to keep doing so”: Historical Jesus – Two Centuries Worth of Citations.

Herein we continue, from part 1, part 2, part 3, considering info on the Devil from Aurelius Ambrosius aka St. Ambrose bishop of Milan (340-397 AD). The fuller complete result consists of quotations of those sections within the text that refer to Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Devil, Satan, demons, serpent and dragon.

…the doctrine of the Serpent Seed
(or the doctrine of the Original Sin) is neither an allegory, a myth, a legend,

nor a fable, but is based on literal historical facts…

—Richard Gan

Herein we continue considering Rev. Richard Gan’s article The Doctrine of the Serpent Seed and The Doctrine of the Original Sin… which derives from his 1998 AD book, “The Serpent Seed THE ORIGINAL SIN.” You can find the whole series here.

Richard Gan states that OF ALL THE ANIMALS HE WAS THE ONLY SPECIES THAT COULD TALK!…he looked like a man and could talk…Some may argue that he was able to talk because he was possessed by Satan” and that “the Serpent who beguiled Eve, and not Satan. So, it was not Satan speaking through the Serpent.” Thus, according to Gan there is a difference between the serpent and Satan at which point I will reference Revelation chaps 12 and 20 both of which refer to “the great dragon…that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan.”
But no, this is not lost upon Gan as he wrote, “must have possessed a certain prophetic revelation to name the Serpent as such, for that name has been associated with the evil one (Satan) throughout the Bible…The name Serpent has become synonymous with the name Satan.”

Gan asks “And who did God judge — Satan or the Serpent? The Serpent no longer exists today because he had been cursed and transformed into a snake…He was originally not related to snakes whatsoever, but now when we say ‘serpent’, we would generally picture a long slimy wriggly snake…”
I must admit being flummoxed as the Hebrew term for serpent is thereafter employed another 31 times in for serpents throughout the Bible—for detials on this fascinating and telling word, see On satan, divination and metal. Thus, Gan can seek to claim that all serpents are snakes or that serpents no longer exist but only snakes do, etc. but this is merely a semantic word game.

Moreover, and in addition Gan writes, “The Serpent was cursed and transformed from an upright animal to a belly crawling reptile — a snake!…he went on his belly after the curse, and not before!” The fact is that the Bible’s greater context is that going upon one’s belly and consuming dust is a metaphor for being humbled, see Deuteronomy 32:24, Psalm 72:9, Micah 7:17 and Lamentations 3:27-28.

Image from Richard Gan’s article/book

But why even claim that there are no more serpents? Because of his particular and peculiar definition which is his claim that “it is clearly stated in the Bible that the Serpent was originally an upright creature!…Being the last of the animals created before Adam, the Serpent was ranked next to man and looked very much like a man. We can actually say that he is the ‘missing link’ between the animals and the human race.”
Just when Darwinists are done telling us that humans evolved from apes along come serpent seedline of Satan theorists to tell us that we evolved from serpents or one serpent but then again humans were already around since Adam and Eve interacted with this serpent so there goes that.

In fact, within an appendix, Gan notes as much, “This ‘missing link’ certainly does not fit into Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. Animals did not evolve from a lower form of life, neither did Man evolve from the monkey. The Bible says that each species of creatures was created separately and distinctively from the others. Except for the Serpent, all the other animals exist today in the same form in which they have been created since the beginning of time.” So then, why claim that the serpent is the missing link?
As far as I can tell, on this point Richard Gan is merely repeating the unfounded claims of William Branham who taught, “Here’s the missing link…The serpent is that missing person between the chimpanzee and the man” (see On William Branham’s sermon “The Serpent’s Seed” and since Branham is considered to be a prophet by Gan and also Trinidad’s Bethel-The House of God, they too have written that the serpent “was a special class of a beast and that is the ‘missing link’ between man and chimpanzee” (see Bethel-The House of God on “The Original Sin (The Serpent Seed)”).

Richard Gan also writes, “the one that was created to be the servant of Adam was named Serpent” which is a 100% invention which is likely why there are no quotations or citation to this assertion.

Richard Gan wrote that “Eve succumbed to his seduction…the Devil-possessed Serpent committed fornication with the woman…the Devil had caused her to fornicate with the Serpent.”
This relates to his noting that via interbreeding “man has caused the seeds of some of the animals to mix resulting in the death of the seed, that is, the hybrid is sterile; it cannot bring forth life. The penalty for tampering with the law of God is Death.”
Keeping that in mind, note that he writes, “a hybrid — Cain — a perverted seed!…Cain, being a hybrid, did not bear the image and likeness of Adam.” So, Cain did not bear Adam’s image/likeness which is something he gets from 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.” I would hate to think that just because one of my kids looks more like me than the others, someone will someday build a theory upon it. In any case, Gan claims due as a follow upon on his claim that Cain is a hybrid. However, he notes that hybrids are sterile which results in death: as the bloodline/seedline ends with the hybrid who cannot reproduce. Yet, Genesis 5 begins to detail Cain’s children thus, he was not a hybrid, was not sterile, etc.

Also, the point of the theorists when they reference Seth being as such is that this is being emphasized of Seth in counter distinction to Cain who was only half human, etc. However, This cannot be the case since Abel was of Adam and Eve.

This also is not lost upon Gan as he later wrote, “when Adam’s descendants intermingled with the descendants of Cain…mankind became part and parcel of the animal kingdom” (whatever that means).
In fact, Gan refers to “Cain’s own genealogy.” He claims that Lamech is “the first person to go against God’s will of one man, one wife (Gen.2:23-24). He married two wives. (Polygamy was permitted of God only after the Flood when the seeds of Adam (through Seth) and Cain were already mixed.” The biblical fact is that people practiced polygamy pre and post flood and a further biblical fact is that it states nowhere at all that it was permitted by God.

Note that as is very common to serpent seed of Satan theorist, gan writes, “was the seed of the Serpent (Gen.3:15) and the “son” of the Wicked One — Satan (1Jhn.3:12).” This seems plain enough however, 1 John.3:12 does not, I repeat not, state that Cain was of the wicked one. Rather, it states (beginning at v. 11), “For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. 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.” You see, this was not about genetics and Cain was not of that wicked one because that wicked one was his physical dad. Rather, he was of that wicked one due to his actions in that he slew his brother and we are even told why he did so because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous. Thus, it is all about actions: sinful actions.
I will note that later on in his book Gan does get around to writing, “His works were evil in that they were self-righteous (1Jhn.3:12; Isa.64:6).” So he is at least aware of the point of the text at least in passing: even if he disregard the point that it is about actions. But what of Isaiah 64:6? It states, “But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away” so I am unsure what that has to do with the issue of Cain directly.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page.

Twitter: #Serpentseed, #RichardGan, #Seedlines
Facebook: #Serpentseed, #RichardGan, #Seedlines

As has been elucidated in various articles found with the Serpent Seed category: the Bible does speak the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. Yet, it does not, in any way, relate seed of the serpent to Cain being the result of Eve having sex with Satan.

In fact, since the serpent seed of Satan theory is not biblical, promulgators, such as those listed below, have different ideas as to who the seedlines / bloodlines are.