…Genesis 4:1. “And Adam knew his wife, and she conceived and bare Cain.” Notice that what is not said is more significant that what is said, the Bible nowhere says Adam begat Cain…there are
literal children of Satan surviving in the world today…
—Bertrand L. Comparet
With this series I will consider Bertrand L. Comparet, A.B., J.D.’s The Cain/Satanic Seed Line. You can find the series on Comparet here.
I cannot tell who plagiarized whom but the Bertrand L. Comparet writing under consideration is virtually word for word just like Willie Martin’s The Cain Satanic Seedline.
We can instantly discern a vicious circle in Comparet’s teachings we he (mis)uses the Bible to justify his (unjustifiable) racism and uses his racism to justify his (mis)interpretations on the Bible. Straight away, he notes that “The battle lines are drawn by Yahweh in Genesis 3:15, where He states he is going to put enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent.” Thus, he justifies his racism by claiming that God created enmity between races (biblically there is only one race as we all come from Adam and Eve).
He claims that “one of the central themes of the Bible, the fight for supremacy between the children of Yahweh and the children of Lucifer” and therefore, “there are literal children of Satan surviving in the world today.”
Bertrand L. Comparet then makes a true point and a false one. It is true that “Satan wasn’t a serpent…wasn’t a scaly thing wriggling along on the ground.” Yet, it is false that Satan is “A fallen angel” since as per Ezekiel 28:14 Satan is a Cherub and Angels and Cherubim are different categories of being: they have different titles, different jobs, look different, etc.
Comparet states that he will consider Genesis 3:3 in the “King James translation and I will correct it as I go.” Of course, he will have to “correct” because the plain reading of the text (in any version actually) knows nothing about Eve having sex with Satan. His so called correction is to note that “Fruit is the Hebrew word pirchach, meaning progeny, brood, children or descendants. Do you talk about the children of a walnut tree or an apple tree? Of course you don’t!” Firstly, our modern day common parlance is irrelevant. Secondly, the Hebrew word in the text is not pirchach (Strong’s H6526) which only appears in Job 30:12 wherein it is translated as “youth.” Rather, pĕriy aka ū·mip·pə·rî (Strong’s H6529) which the KJV translates as fruit (113x), fruitful (2x), boughs (1x), firstfruits (with H7225) (1x), reward (1x), fruit thereof (1x). It is a word that comes from H6509 “fruit (literally or figuratively):—bough, (first-)fruit(-ful), reward.” Here are the specific definitions, “I. fruit A. fruit, produce (of the ground) B. fruit, offspring, children, progeny (of the womb) C. fruit (of actions) (fig.).”
Yet, in any case indeed, as with any word in any language: this word has more than one meaning and more than one application. This is simply irrelevant as it is context and not etymology or picking and choosing definitions which determines meaning.
Bertrand L. Comparet’s point is that it is “Of the pirchach” who are “of the descendants of the tree” about which “Yahweh has said, ‘Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it.’” We get another Hebrew less as he claims that naga (Strong’s H5060), “is a more polite expression meaning, to have sexual intercourse with. Do you need to be warned not to have sexual intercourse with an apple? Of course not, it isn’t that kind of a tree.”
Firstly, the Bible never refers to the fruit as an “apple.” Secondly, I have already posted on the words tree, eat, touch, fruit, etc. so the interested reader can see Disambiguating the serpent seedline of Satan theory in Genesis 3, part 1.
Yet, I will comment on this sort of word play only this one last time with regards to Comparet.
The KJV translates the term as: touch (92x), came (18x), reach (11x), bring (4x), near (4x), smite (4x), nigh (3x), plagued (3x), happeneth (2x), strike (2x), beaten (1x), cast (1x), reach up (1x), brought down (1x), join (1x), laid (1x), get up.
Nothing to see here.
Yet, is the Biblical Usage: “I. to touch, reach, strike A. (Qal) i. to touch ii. to strike iii. to reach, extend to iv. to be stricken a. stricken (participle) B. (Niphal) to be stricken, be defeated C. (Piel) to strike D. (Pual) to be stricken (by disease) E. (Hiphil) to cause to touch, reach, approach, arrive i. to cause to touch, apply ii. to reach, extend, attain, arrive, come iii. to approach (of time) iv. to befall (of fate).”
Nothing to see here.
Ah, but, but, but here is the definition: “a primitive root; properly, to touch, i.e. lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphemistically, to lie with a woman); by implication, to reach (figuratively, to arrive, acquire); violently, to strike (punish, defeat, destroy, etc.):—beat, (× be able to) bring (down), cast, come (nigh), draw near (nigh), get up, happen, join, near, plague, reach (up), smite, strike, touch.”
At last!!! From the translations and usages there is one and only one reference to that is can be a euphemism for to lie with a woman and serpent seedline of Satan theorists such as Comparet will jump on this one statement and, as did he, pretend that it is the only meaning.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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: #BertrandComparet, #Seedlines, #Racism
Facebook: #BertrandComparet, #Seedlines, #Racism