Cain and Abel: Explanation Please. Pretty Pretty Please!

[Huggy Bear]

It's talking about carnal begetting between human daughters and divine beings. It isn't even ambiguous. Sorry if it doesn't meet your definition of angels but that is what is says.

Wrong again. There is nothing in the Bible that says it was "divine beings" it simply says "sons of God". Angels were never created to be sons of God, They were created to serve God, In fact the word "angel" simply means "messenger".

Man being made in the image of God are his children, and when mankind fell, he had to redeem them because of the love he had for his children. There is no redemption for the fallen angels.

Nope that's the cruddy King James which is a lousy translation. I've quoted the NRVS. But they mean the same thing. Seed is offspring. I agree god is talking to the serpent. But god says Eve's descendants and the serpent's will be enemies because they aren't they same decedents. If your interpretation were right Cain would be the child of both Eve and the Serpent.

The King James version is a lousy translation? The KJV was translated directly from the original Hebrew and Greek, see for yourself.

The original Hebrew
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInter..._Index.htm
Genesis 3:15

It clearly states that the serpent had a seed, and that God would put enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman, which manifested itself starting with Cain and Abel on down to Jesus and Judas.

[The Grand Nudger]

It clearly states that the serpent had a seed, and that God would put enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman, which manifested itself starting with Cain and Abel on down to Jesus and Judas.

I like this version too. You know there's one where it's a woman between the brothers - envy, perhaps much more empatheticaly(?) so. Though how "god" and "woman" might differ for guys with such limited prospects, I have no clue.

[Huggy Bear]

If you notice, knowledge came through the line of Cain, they were the inventors and scientists.

Well then, at least we now have motivation for the bizarre assertion that Cain wasn't the son of Adam; hatred for human achievement. What else can explain a passion for contriving a mechanism by which science, technology, and music are to be the responsibility of the Devil? It's one thing to be gullible enough to accept the Bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God; it's an altogether special brand of lunacy that allows someone to wield the Bible as some conspiratorial weapon of mass delusion. I suppose the author of Matthew was the first of this kind.

Playing hopscotch through the Bible stringing together unrelated passages in an attempt to demonstrate some otherwise untold story or manufacture a prognostication is not Biblical scholarship; it's meaningless drivel. It's almost as if people that do this, mostly evangelicals, have concluded that the Bible wasn't sufficient. If I were a literalist believer, I think I would reconsider effectively telling God that his literary claim to fame was an inadequate pile of shit.

Where do you get "hatred" from? I'm just showing the differences between the descendants of Adam and the descendants of Cain. The descendants of Adam have always been simple people. The descendants of Cain went on to found great civilizations. The antediluvian time period was a time of great technological achievement.

On the other hand look at the followers of Jesus, the Bible says that Peter was ignorant and unlearned, John the baptist lived in the wilderness like a wild man, eating locusts and honey.

This goes to show that theology is nonsense. And to be clear, I'm not against knowledge, if you could be highly educated and believe in God, then fine. But that's usually not the case.

The two most highly educated people in the Bible were Moses and Paul, Moses being educated by the Pharaoh, and Paul by the renowned teacher Gamaliel. Moses had to spend 40 years in exile before God could use him (he was around 80 years old at the time of the exodus) and Paul stated that he had to forget everything he learned.

[Minimalist]

The two most highly educated people in the Bible were Moses and Paul, Moses being educated by the Pharaoh, and Paul by the renowned teacher Gamaliel.

Yeah...and King Arthur was educated by Merlin and Luke Skywalker by Yoda.

All four have much in common. They are made up bullshit.

[The Grand Nudger]

Moses had to

Snipped, he didn't(anything) but that's okay.

Paul stated that he had to forget everything he learned.

-in the notes he left us describing all that he had learned -along with the "suggestion" that we should live our lives accordingly.

[Huggy Bear]

The two most highly educated people in the Bible were Moses and Paul, Moses being educated by the Pharaoh, and Paul by the renowned teacher Gamaliel.

Yeah...and King Arthur was educated by Merlin and Luke Skywalker by Yoda.

All four have much in common. They are made up bullshit.

I don't think there is any dispute about the existence of Paul.

[Jenny A]

It's talking about carnal begetting between human daughters and divine beings. It isn't even ambiguous. Sorry if it doesn't meet your definition of angels but that is what is says.

Wrong again. There is nothing in the Bible that says it was "divine beings" it simply says "sons of God". Angels were never created to be sons of God, They were created to serve God, In fact the word "angel" simply means "messenger".

Man being made in the image of God are his children, and when mankind fell, he had to redeem them because of the love he had for his children. There is no redemption for the fallen angels.

Nope that's the cruddy King James which is a lousy translation. I've quoted the NRVS. But they mean the same thing. Seed is offspring. I agree god is talking to the serpent. But god says Eve's descendants and the serpent's will be enemies because they aren't they same decedents. If your interpretation were right Cain would be the child of both Eve and the Serpent.

The King James version is a lousy translation? The KJV was translated directly from the original Hebrew and Greek, see for yourself.

The original Hebrew
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInter..._Index.htm
Genesis 3:15

It clearly states that the serpent had a seed, and that God would put enmity between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman, which manifested itself starting with Cain and Abel on down to Jesus and Judas.

*sigh* Just read the text. Nowhere does it say that Eve slept with the serpent. It does say in all translations that Eve's descendants (or seed if you must) and the serpent's will be at odds. If Eve and the serpent produced Cain (not Biblical) than Eve and the Serpent's seed would be the same. Think!

The NRSV and other versions were also translated from the original Hebrew. But the KJ is hardly the latest or the greatest and was translated with a heavy bias--not to mention it's use of archaic English terms such as seed for descendants and knew instead of sex, etc. Read a Jewish translation or the NRSV--also both from Hebrew.

As to angels read the whole section, then tell me who the Nephilim are. I don't give a damn whether god redeems them.

There are effectively two views regarding the identity of the nephilim, which follow on from alternative views about the identity of the sons of God (Bənê hāʼĕlōhîm):

Offspring of Seth: The Qumran (Dead Sea Scroll) fragment 4Q417 (4QInstruction) contains the earliest known reference to the phrase "children of Seth", stating that God has condemned them for their rebellion. Other early references to the offspring of Seth rebelling from God and mingling with the daughters of Cain, are found in rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, Augustine of Hippo, Julius Africanus, and the Letters attributed to St. Clement. It is also the view expressed in the modern canonical Amharic Ethiopian Orthodox Bible.

Offspring of angels: A number of early sources refer to the "sons of heaven" as angels. The earliest such references seem to be in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Greek, and Aramaic Enochic literature, and in certain Ge'ez manuscripts of 1 Enoch (mss A–Q) and Jubilees used by western scholars in modern editions of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Some Christian apologists, such as Tertullian and especially Lactantius, shared this opinion. The earliest statement in a secondary commentary explicitly interpreting this to mean that angelic beings mated with humans can be traced to the rabbinical Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and it has since become especially commonplace in modern-day Christian commentaries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim

Take your pick, but they both go back to antiquity. However, unless you follow the orthodox standard, it's angels not the sons of Seth.

---

I'm just showing the differences between the descendants of Adam and the descendants of Cain. The descendants of Adam have always been simple people. The descendants of Cain went on to found great civilizations. The antediluvian time period was a time of great technological achievement.

Cain's descendants are all Adam's descendants because Cain is Adam's son. Cain are Seth are both Adam's sons as was the childless Abel. Adam also had other sons and daughters. Genesis 5:4. Chapter 4 lists Cain's descendants and Chapter 5 lists Seth's. Neither lists the descendants of Adam's other sons and daughters.

[FifthElement]

The antediluvian time period was a time of great technological achievement.

Seriously ?

[Minimalist]

Yeah...and King Arthur was educated by Merlin and Luke Skywalker by Yoda.

All four have much in common. They are made up bullshit.

I don't think there is any dispute about the existence of Paul.

You wouldn't because you are a brainwashed fool.

Nonethless, no one seems to have heard of the fucker until the second century.

[Huggy Bear]

The antediluvian time period was a time of great technological achievement.

Seriously ?