Serpent Seed and Sons of God...

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Still, if all that was true, none of that hinders a person from being used in the gifts. You think those things say he could not have been used in the gifts? The gifts do not require a person's entrance into the Kingdom, you know.

Do you believe someone can operate in the manifestation of the Spirit without having the Holy Ghost?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Do you believe someone can operate in the manifestation of the Spirit without having the Holy Ghost?

Interesting question. The disciples did before the cross. But do you think a person doesn't have the Holy Ghost just because they do the things you listed? God is really longsuffering.

[shazeep]

ya God seems to consistently choose people that humans have rejected. I doubt the Holy Spirit adheres to the standard human definitions.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

i agree, and as Votive noted, Adam lay with Eve to ostensibly conceive Cain. But the timing is sure interesting.

"ostensibly" ? ? ?

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

funny tho that Enos is translated "mortal man," and the Jewish interpretation of that verse, "men began calling on the name of the Lord," means to them that that was when men first began calling inanimate idols "lord." Whether that is true or not, it sure seems to torture the syntax @ Gen 6:2. And denies the refs in Jude, i'd say. Any explanation here seems to be fraught with problems.
Demons have spiritual influence; they do not come physically. Pretty sure that would violate Free Will, also, despite the couple examples we have that could be read as "physical" interactions; i suspect they are spiritual ones.

Problem is that man mixes their imagination in with scripture

(1) In naming his son Enos, Seth (Enos’ father) was professing that
ALL men since Adam are mortal (subject to dying). In effect, he was
also confessing that he believed the curse placed upon Adam: "...on
the day that you eat thereof, dying, you shall surely die."

(2) In that scripture, the definition for calling is: “to ask for; to invite;
to seek (after)”. WHY? Because until then, no one knew God’s NAME! We
must Remember that His NAME was not revealed to Moses until Ex. 6:3. Til
then, the NAME of God remained hidden!

Seth (Abel’s substitute) was a righteous man, and he influenced other
men to follow after him: and so after Enos was born, they “…began to
call upon
the NAME of the Lord.” In other words, they began to ask God for God’s
NAME!

(3) Seth and those men who followed after him DID NOT call upon
inanimate objects: Seth, et al, still had the testimony of Adam and Eve.,,
and Abel!

If anyone called upon inanimate objects, it was the lineage of Cain.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

"ostensibly" ? ? ?

i say that because we have other instances of unclear timing in Scripture. The passage is enough to invalidate Serpent Seed to me, but it's strange that Eve did not conceive until right then, until after the Fall, if she had no navel.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Problem is that man mixes their imagination in with scripture

(1) In naming his son Enos, Seth (Enos’ father) was professing that
ALL men since Adam are mortal (subject to dying). In effect, he was
also confessing that he believed the curse placed upon Adam: "...on
the day that you eat thereof, dying, you shall surely die."

still, undeniably representing ha Adam, as opposed to ha Elohim.

Originally Posted by thephnxman

(2) In that scripture, the definition for calling is: “to ask for; to invite;
to seek (after)”. WHY? Because until then, no one knew God’s NAME! We
must Remember that His NAME was not revealed to Moses until Ex. 6:3. Til
then, the NAME of God remained hidden!

Well, we have Why do you ask My Name? For it is secret (wonderful, unpronouceable) so i don't know; i was just repeating how a Jew would translate that verse. One must ask how they began calling on the Name of the Lord there, if it wasn't revealed until the Exodus?

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Seth (Abel’s substitute) was a righteous man, and he influenced other
men to follow after him: and so after Enos was born, they “…began to
call upon
the NAME of the Lord.” In other words, they began to ask God for God’s
NAME!

began, like just then?

Originally Posted by thephnxman

(3) Seth and those men who followed after him DID NOT call upon
inanimate objects: Seth, et al, still had the testimony of Adam and Eve.,,
and Abel!

making "began" there kind of incongruous?

Originally Posted by thephnxman

If anyone called upon inanimate objects, it was the lineage of Cain.

boy, you'd think his line would really be calling upon God though, huh? I think we'd like to believe this, but we have plenty of evidence of idolatry among the chosen, so the Jewish interpretation of men (ha Adam) began calling upon the Lord is at least interesting. But i really haven't dug there at all.

[mfblume]

"Men began calling on the name of the Lord" is alternatively translated "Men began to call themselves by the name of the Lord." Taaht fits quite well with sons of God being godly line of Seth while daughters of men the ungodly line of Cain. This is especially so when you consider Gen 6 begins with men spreading across the face of the earth until Seth's line and Cain's line met.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

still, undeniably representing ha Adam, as opposed to ha Elohim.
Well, we have Why do you ask My Name? For it is secret (wonderful, unpronouceable) so i don't know; i was just repeating how a Jew would translate that verse. One must ask how they began calling on the Name of the Lord there, if it wasn't revealed until the Exodus?
began, like just then?
making "began" there kind of incongruous?
boy, you'd think his line would really be calling upon God though, huh? I think we'd like to believe this, but we have plenty of evidence of idolatry among the chosen, so the Jewish interpretation of men (ha Adam) began calling upon the Lord is at least interesting. But i really haven't dug there at all.

Can two walk together and not be agreed?

I guess that's why we are NOT walking together.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by mfblume

"Men began calling on the name of the Lord" is alternatively translated (1) "Men began to call themselves by the name of the Lord." Taaht fits quite well with (2) sons of God being godly line of Seth while daughters of men the ungodly line of Cain. This is especially so when you consider Gen 6 begins with men spreading across the face of the earth until Seth's line and Cain's line met.

Man is still missing the mark.

(1) How could men possibly call themselves by the NAME of the Lord,
being ignorant of it? His NAME is NOT El-ohim, the I AM, etc. The NAME
that pleased God to be known by is YAH: translated, Savior.

YAH-weh (Je-hovah): the NAME of promise;
YAH-shua (Je-sus): the NAME that fulfilled ALL of God's promises.

(2) AMEN! Seth's lineages was holy; while Cain's, not so. What
made Abel's lineage holy was not God's "NAME", but by following after
righteousness (See example of Cain and Abel's sacrifice). And what
made Cain's lineage unholy was in not following after righteousness

"For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen..."