Just caught up to this bread.

If you are still here:

ALL (LB)

>>6625291

>IMO it seems there are 2 different sets of humans created in Genesis…just wanted clarification…

The Elohiym created the beings outside the Garden of Eden, who were told to multiply/procreate. They were told they could have "any tree" for meat/food. They were hunter/gatherers. Nomadic wanderers, who foraged but did not farm.

In Genesis 2, YHVH Elohiym sees there is "no man to till the soil" and creates Adam and subsequently Eve. After Adam and Eve are cast out of the Garden, Cain later is expelled and goes to the land of Nod…which means the land of wandering. That is where he met the hunter/gatherers created by the Elohiym and took a wife.

Sumer is often called a "pop up culture", as there was no proof that they experimented in say, the smithing of metals. But suddenly, Sumer springs up out of nowhere with the ability to artifice in brass and iron, farming, animal husbandry, and even music. Are these not the exact attributes given to Cain and his offspring in Genesis 4:20-22?

>>6625291

>but it specifically says Adam and Eve are Cains parents….

No it doesn't. It says that YHVH Elohiym told Eve that because of her "encounter" with the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, that she will now bare a child. Don't overlook the obvious…If Adam and Eve "ate" fruit, then why, upon the realization of their "sin", did they immediately cover their genitals/nakedness?

Further, don't overlook what YHVH Elohiym said to the Serpent/Nachash: That he would place ENMITY/hatred between Nacash and the woman, and between HIS seed and HER seed. (GEN 3).

Cain, of course, HATES Abel and kills him. Upon "knowing" Adam again, Eve recognizes that Seth was born to replace the seed of Abel which Cain hated and killed.

Cain is not listed listed in GEN 5's account of Adam's geneology. Next, look at Cain's geneology (GEN 4), and notice that it is listed separately. Also notice that Cain's offspring (their names) look and sound very similar to that of Adam's (offspring). This is a foreshadowing of Christ speaking of the wheat and the tares, that look very similar, until the end of the harvest, where the tares reveal themselves to be worthless look-a-likes.

Think of the Matthew 13:24-13:30 parable of the "man that sowed GOOD seed in his field". It is the only parable in the Bible that Christ explains…And when he does, (MAT 13:37-43) he clearly states that "the field is the WORLD, that the good seed/wheat are the children of the Kingdom, and that bad seed/tares were sown by the Devil."

>>6625291

>hybrids did exist I believe…but it was elohim and enlil and all those sumerian fuck heads that were messing with our dna

You are confusing two stories, and two different epochs of time. But let's not ignore the irony that people willingly jump at the idea of EA being the Father God to two brothers, one good, one evil. Why? Because it is "ancient" Sumerian…that makes it older than the Bible!

Plus, EA, Enki, and Enlil are ALIENS from another planet…They weren't really "Gods"…they genetically manipulated the neanderthal population to be unrebelious slaves.

The end result is that people believe in EA, Enki, and Enlil, but cannot see the parallel of a Father God/YHVH Elohiym, and his good son and bad son, The Christ and Heyleyl.

All of the events recorded by the Sumerians belong to the age known in Egypt as Zep Tepi. Those events transpired prior to Genesis 1:1.

>>6625704

You are ignorant. That guy is a typical 501(c)3 religionfaggot who lacks knowledge and spiritual insight. That is why you love him and spam him. Because you parrot his teachings, not that of the Christ, who clearly told the children of Cain, who had infiltrated the priesthood back in the days of Ezra, and were lying in wait to kill him when he was born.

Christ clearly identified the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin as "the offspring of Serpents" and the "generation of Vipers" who "sit in the seat of Moses". This is a direct reference to Exodus, where Moses' father in law, Jethro, talks Moses into dividing his authority into 70 "elders" so that he could more adequately do God's work.

Of course, Jethro, we are told, is a Kenite, (JUD 1:16), which means he is of the lineage of CAIN. This was where the Serpent's Seed first gained authority into the priesthood, as, this group's offspring would later become the very Sanhedrin who "sat in the seat of Moses" seeking to do THEIR FATHER's work, which was to seek out and kill the son of the Vineyard's owner.

Christ clearly taught this throughout his parables. If you don't comprehend it, is because you have not eyes to see or ears to hear. But here you are, pretending you have insight, when all you are doing is regurgitating the blindest interpretation and noob understanding.

>>6625780

>Heiser is one of the BEST Biblical historians / scholars of modern times.

You clearly are a respecter of men and their flawed teachings. Everything I just listed was referenced back to the Bible. You are a master of nothing, who simply posts video theology that you then parrot like a child. A simpleton ignoramus, who thinks it your job to tell people what to believe. I was answering an anon's question, and don't give a fuck what you think.

>>6625790

This place was always better without you noobfaggot biblethumping queers. Fuckin' newfags gonna biblefag. And you think you don't stick out? You glow worse than some of the shills.

But since you opened your pie hole…

Are you denying that Christ stated that the Sanhedrin/Pharasees were the offspring of serpents who sit in the seat of Moses?

Are you denying that Christ said that the Devil

planted the "bad seed" in the "field", which he stated is the World?

Are you denying that Christ said that he himself was the planter of the good seeds?

Are you denying that Moses, at the urgence of Jethro, appointed the very group who millennia later, Christ said were the offspring serpents who sat in the Seat of Moses?

Are you denying that the Bible says that Jethro is a Kenite/Son of Cain?

Are you denying that when sent to count the Priesthood, Ezra stated that there was not a single Levite in the Priesthood because they had been infiltrated and replaced?

Ezr 8:15

¶

And I gathered them together to the river that runneth to Ahava; and there abode we in tents three days: and I viewed the people, and the priests, and found there none of the sons of Levi.

And the fact that you tried to muddy and besmirch my comments by implying that I push the "Ancient Alien" theory, proves either your inability to comprehend what I stated, or that you have ulterior motives and have been caught falsely representing what I said.

Either way, you are a fecal worm with little of no understanding. Keep following your Dr. SoAndSo. I haven't said anything that cannot be looked up, and discerned by any anon. You are here with the cookie-cutter campaign of some Dr. whom you obviously respect more than what can be gleaned from letting the Word speak for Itself.

So here is a riddle for you, little regurgitator…

WHO EXACTLY are these people who claim to be of Abraham's SEED, yet claim that they have NEVER been in bondage to "any man"?

JOHN Chapter 8:33

33) They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

What about the bondage of Egypt? Assyria? Babylon?

So what group of people were NOT in bondage in Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon, who can still claim to be of Abraham's seed?

If you can't answer this question, just post another video or some ad hominem attack telling me that I am stoopid because I don't follow you and your knob-scholar.

>>6625913

>>6625679

>

>Best Post on this board in a minute.

>

>Good on you, Anon.

Thanks fren. Such a huge subject to try and nutshell even the most basic of framework. Not that this is the correct chan for it…but I posted it because the JQ is in every thread. The Bible clearly states that these people exist, "Jews who are not Jews, and are the Synagogue of Satan." That is why MAT 13's parable is so important as more people awaken to who these people are. They are look-a-likes. Frauds. But Christ said to let them grow till the harvest, lest while rooting out the TARES, you damage the WHEAT.

To me, the Bible makes no sense at all, unless you realize that it states that we are living amongst a hybrid bloodline that, although in this life are rewarded with material wealth, is bound straight for hell for the perpetual evil they have foisted upon the world for millennia.

They infiltrated Israel's priesthood and were lying in wait to kill the Messiah. You have to kek at the idea of him only speaking in parables, so that the Sanhedrin/Pharasees couldn't understand what he was saying. Even kekkier is that when they realized he was talking about them, they conspired to kill him. And this…immediately after Christ had told a parable that described them killing him to steal the Vineyard.

But yeah, point out the TARES, yes.

We don't have to attack them.

Judge them by their fruits.

>>6625735

>thank you anon…still hard to know what to trust but I read everything you wrote will look into some things I didnt know about

Great. That is ultimately what this should be about. And yeah, there are also hybrids. According to my own decades of studying, Cain is in fact the son of Lucifer. That makes him a half-breed hybrid of human/angelic. When we factor in Genesis 6 and the giants/gebhor, it seems that when the human/hybrid bloodline of Cain meets up with other Fallen Angels, you get mutations.

Also, look into how all of this fits into the Rh negative bloodlines versus those with the monkey antigen.

>>6626007

>I’m sure you “wish” I was a newfag. Wrong again.

Look jackass, I been here on the Nightshift and Graveyard since the dawn of fucking time. Tonight is the first night I have seen your cherry-ass spamming your cut/paste Dr. Knob-gobbler-scholar rhetoric. So yeah, you are a newfag. If you had been here any length of time, you would know how clear you biblefags stick out when you first show up.

>>6626007

>- In Matthew 12:34 - Here Jesus is insulting the Sadducees & Pharisees, but he’s actually giving them a metaphor, specifically the viper.

First of all, Christ spoke in PARABLES, not metaphors. My gawd you are paralyzingly ignorant.

Mat 13:13

Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

How can you SEE or HEAR a parable that you think is a metaphor? And you think me blind and deaf?

Mat 13:34

All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

Mat 13:35

That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

What about what your claim regarding "metaphors" can own up to Christ's own statement that he was about to reveal secrets kept hidden from the foundation of the world?

Metaphors substitute one thing for another in comparison. Parables hide secrets within the overall context of the story itself. Funny that a person who thinks Christ was using metaphors also considers themselves to be a teacher.

>>6626007

>The viper is aggressive, poisonous, deadly and ugly. Vipers have forked tongues and venomous fangs. They aggressively attack and poison victims and they don’t let go. Their poisonous bites often lead to painful deaths.

Christ nor John the Baptist said NONE of that.

Those are your own words.

But what is the actual Greek word's area of meaning? The word that your Bible is using is "brood", but that is only a translation. What is the actual word, and what is it's area of meaning?

STRONGS NT 1081: γέννημα

γέννημα, -τος, τό, (from γεννάω), that which has been begotten or born;

a. as in the earlier Greek writings from Sophocles down, the offspring, progeny, of men or of animals: ἐχιδνῶν, Matthew 3:7; Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33; Luke 3:7; (γυναικῶν, Sir. 10:18).

It clearly means progeny. This is more evident when looking at the root of the word itself:

γεννάω gennáō, ghen-nah'-o; from a variation of G1085; to procreate (properly, of the father, but by extension of the mother); figuratively, to regenerate:—bear, beget, be born, bring forth, conceive, be delivered of, gender, make, spring.

So no, Christ wasn't speaking in metaphor about all of this bullshit that you are claiming——→

>>6626007

>"The viper is aggressive, poisonous, deadly and ugly. Vipers have forked tongues and venomous fangs. They aggressively attack and poison victims and they don’t let go. Their poisonous bites often lead to painful deaths."

>>6626249

cont'd

>Matthew 3:7

>

>- But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

>

>- In Matthew 3:7 John the Baptist tells the Sadducees & Pharisees that they had become corrupt, legalistic, immoral and hypocritical and would eventually be responsible for crucifying the Son of God. He uses the viper metaphor to describe their collective behavior.

More of your own words inserted into the text. Anyone can read those few verses and see that you are bastardizing the passage.

The Greek words mean PROGENY, OFFSPRING. Both Christ and John the Baptist before him, taught who was the seed of the Serpent. Who do you think told John the Baptist about the offspring of the serpent?

His father, Zacharia.

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.

FFS, open your eyes and stop listening to your knob-gobbler-scholar.

Read Christ's own words, he literally says that THEY ARE THE CHILDREN of those who killed the prophets, and all of the blood, from Zacharia's, all the way back to righteous Abel whom Cain killed, being a murderer from the beginning…is upon THEM. And you think this is metaphor?!?

Mat 23:31

Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.

Mat 23:32

Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.

Mat 23:33

Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

So to imply that these are metaphors is proven false by the text itself. To imply that PROGENY is not the subject matter, is completely eisegetical to what the text nakedly states: That Christ, John, and his father Zacharias ALL taught that these people were the offspring of Serpents, who sat in the Seat of Moses, appointed at the urgence of a Kenite, son of Cain, the original murderer, and son of Heyleyl.

Your ignorance is stupifying. You think parables are metaphors, and you deny that in the context of the passage in question, that Christ specifically said that *they were the CHILDREN of those who killed the prophets, going back to Abel whom Cain slew".

The unfolding of these passages as I have presented them, is completely exegetical. Your interpretation is complete eisegetical nonsense, which denies the face value of what is clearly stated. Now go look up those words, and come back in an hour to pretend that you knew what they meant "all along".