Parable of the Tares

(TallMan;65569)
Well, when it says "Adam knew Eve", it means had sexual relations with, the clear implication, to me at least, it that Cain was the offspring of this union.We know that Cain was " of that wicked one, and slew his brother" (1 John 3:12) for Satan was a murderer from the beginning, so I would say that the thought / evil desire came from Satan. Jesus referred to word as seed in the parable of the sower.Going forward we find a godly seed who believed in God and called upon him, and another lot who boasted in themselves and did evil.A person's works show who their father is.
Hi TallMan,I agree with you on this. The Parable of Wheat and Tares, (Matthew, chapter 13) is a PARABLE. Parables are stories using figurative metaphor to convey a message. We are not to take them at full literal face value, but for what they "symbolize." The "children of the Wicked One" is figure of speech for those who FOLLOW the ways of Satan. Just as "the children of God" is figure of speech, for those who FOLLOW God or walk in the Spirit of God.If WE are NOT the product of God mating with a human woman then why would we believe that Cain is the product of Eve mating with Satan? You see, there is no logic in this.I posted a while back why I don't believe Cain was the child of Satan and Eve. It clearly states in Genesis "Adam KNEW his wife and she conceived".God is not stupid. I think God would have known if Eve had sexual relations with "Nacash", the Serpent". It most certainly would have been mentioned in the book of Genesis if that were so.The other point is what God said to Cain. God asked why Cain was angry and depressed. Then God said "don't you know that if you do well you will be blessed, and if you don't do well, sin is at the door?"If Cain was the offspring of Satan, would God have given Cain the option of "being good" or "doing right"? NO, of course not. He would have said, "get behind me Satan!"Adam and Eve brought "evil" into the world through their deed (disobedience to God). Not only did they disobey God, but they did not take responsibility for it. Eve blamed the Serpent for beguiling her, and Adam blamed God for giving him "the woman". Before they ate of the Tree of Knowledge of GOOD and EVIL, they knew not what evil was. It was this partaking of the figurative fruit of the tree, that brought evil into the world. The Serpent, Nacash, was only the "charmer or enchanter". He was "sneaky and underhanded", the most "subtile" of all the beasts of the field".Eve desired to be "as gods", knowing both good and evil as the Serpent lied to her. Satan also lied to her when he said, "she would not die". Men/women are "evil in deed, not breed". We are ALL "evil" by nature, but we, who follow God, CHOOSE to do good. Free will.As the Apostle Paul quoted from Isaiah, "there is none righteous, no not one", and, "our righteousness is as filthy rags."It is evil MEN and WOMEN who bring evil and darkness to the earth.To suggest that people are the literal offspring of Cain is to suggest there is no free will to choose between good and evil.Why were the people destroyed in the Great Flood? God didn't say because Satan mated with Eve and they bore devils. What did God say? Because the imaginations of their hearts was only evil continually. They only thought to do evil day and day out, except Noah.Kim

(kkboldt;65670)
Hi TallMan,If WE are NOT the product of God mating with a human woman then why would we believe that Cain is the product of Eve mating with Satan? You see, there is no logic in this.
Yes, decent point.

(kkboldt;65670)
Hi TallMan,I agree with you on this. The Parable of Wheat and Tares, (Matthew, chapter 13) is a PARABLE. Parables are stories using figurative metaphor to convey a message. We are not to take them at full literal face value, but for what they "symbolize." The "children of the Wicked One" is figure of speech for those who FOLLOW the ways of Satan. Just as "the children of God" is figure of speech, for those who FOLLOW God or walk in the Spirit of God.If WE are NOT the product of God mating with a human woman then why would we believe that Cain is the product of Eve mating with Satan? You see, there is no logic in this.I posted a while back why I don't believe Cain was the child of Satan and Eve. It clearly states in Genesis "Adam KNEW his wife and she conceived".God is not stupid. I think God would have known if Eve had sexual relations with "Nacash", the Serpent". It most certainly would have been mentioned in the book of Genesis if that were so.The other point is what God said to Cain. God asked why Cain was angry and depressed. Then God said "don't you know that if you do well you will be blessed, and if you don't do well, sin is at the door?"If Cain was the offspring of Satan, would God have given Cain the option of "being good" or "doing right"? NO, of course not. He would have said, "get behind me Satan!"Adam and Eve brought "evil" into the world through their deed (disobedience to God). Not only did they disobey God, but they did not take responsibility for it. Eve blamed the Serpent for beguiling her, and Adam blamed God for giving him "the woman". Before they ate of the Tree of Knowledge of GOOD and EVIL, they knew not what evil was. It was this partaking of the figurative fruit of the tree, that brought evil into the world. The Serpent, Nacash, was only the "charmer or enchanter". He was "sneaky and underhanded", the most "subtile" of all the beasts of the field".Eve desired to be "as gods", knowing both good and evil as the Serpent lied to her. Satan also lied to her when he said, "she would not die". Men/women are "evil in deed, not breed". We are ALL "evil" by nature, but we, who follow God, CHOOSE to do good. Free will.As the Apostle Paul quoted from Isaiah, "there is none righteous, no not one", and, "our righteousness is as filthy rags."It is evil MEN and WOMEN who bring evil and darkness to the earth.To suggest that people are the literal offspring of Cain is to suggest there is no free will to choose between good and evil.Why were the people destroyed in the Great Flood? God didn't say because Satan mated with Eve and they bore devils. What did God say? Because the imaginations of their hearts was only evil continually. They only thought to do evil day and day out, except Noah.Kim
Kim, you just couldn't see. Angels have free will as well as human does. Satan had free will, and he chose himself over God. (Isaiah 14:12-16, Ezekiel 28) It was abomination to God for spirit person (Satan / Leader of Fallen Angels) to have sex with a flesh (human) woman. (Eve)The same is true in Genesis 6. It was abomination to God for spirit people (fallen angels) to marry flesh women. (Genesis 6:2) That is the reason why God needed to bring down the flood.

(kkboldt;65670)
....If WE are NOT the product of God mating with a human woman then why would we believe that Cain is the product of Eve mating with Satan? You see, there is no logic in this.I posted a while back why I don't believe Cain was the child of Satan and Eve. It clearly states in Genesis "Adam KNEW his wife and she conceived".....Kim
Christ IS the product of God mating with a human woman. The Kenites are are product of Satan mating with a human woman, Eve.Christina has all ready mentioned the Scriptures in Genesis concerning this act in the garden. I'm sure she has also mentioned 2Co 11:3; But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled (G1818) Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.G1818ἐξαπατάωexapataōex-ap-at-ah'-oFrom G1537 and G538; to seduce wholly: - beguile, deceive.This word wholly seduced means he, Satan, had intercourse with her, Eve. That is where Cain started, that's where humans start. Gen 4:1 And Adam knew(H3045) Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. Gen 4:2 And she again(H3254) bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. Gen 4:3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. Gen 4:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:We all ready know the meaning of the word "knew" right, Adam did the same thing Satan did, he had intercourse with Eve. Two seeds, one from Satan, one from Eve. And Eve had twins, two seeds and two eggs. Genesis 4:2 And she again(H3254) bare his brother Abel,H3254יסףyâsaphyaw-saf'A primitive root; to add or augment (often adverbially to continue to do a thing): - add, X again, X any more, X cease, X come more, + conceive again, continue, exceed, X further, X gather together, get more, give moreover, X henceforth, increase (more and more), join, X longer (bring, do, make, much, put), X (the, much, yet) more (and more), proceed (further), prolong, put, be [strong-] er, X yet, yield.And she continued in labor and bare his brother Abel. Abel and Cain were twins, that is why they brought their offerings at the same time, they were the same age, they were twins.Believe it or not, it doesn't matter because it doesn't depend on you believing it.Cain generations begin at Genesis 4:17ff, Adams begin at Genesis 5: 1, and Cain is not in Adams genealogy, why not if Cain was Adams son? Because Cain is not Adams son.

(Jordan;65679)
Kim, you just couldn't see. Angels have free will as well as human does. Satan had free will, and he chose himself over God. (Isaiah 14:12-16, Ezekiel 28) It was abomination to God for spirit person (Satan / Leader of Fallen Angels) to have sex with a flesh (human) woman. (Eve)The same is true in Genesis 6. It was abomination to God for spirit people (fallen angels) to marry flesh women. (Genesis 6:2) That is the reason why God needed to bring down the flood.
I disagree, Jordan, that those passages are referring to Satan or Fallen angels. So your argument is a moot point.There is nothing in the Bible that states "Satan is a fallen angel". There is nothing in the Bible that states angels are supernatural beings (spirit people) created by God, EXCEPT for the "Angel of the Lord" which is a theophany of God himself.There is nothing in the Bible that states "angels have free will", unless you use the HUMAN understanding. Then, yes, angels have free will.All the original Hebrew and Greek languages indicate that angels are HUMAN, "messengers", kings, priests, rulers, judges, shepherds. HUMANS. Nothing in the original languages indicates "supernatural or extraterrestrial beings."This is one of the most misunderstood and misinterpreted subjects of the Bible today and has created countless fierce arguments and dismay between Christians.I don't think anyone fully understands just what an "angel" really is. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.Kim

Kim,What Bible do you read? Have you read the whole book? Do you understand what you are reading? Do you know anything about the First earth age? Do you know where we come from? :study: It's all in the BOOK if you would read it with understanding, but them, maybe now isn't your time! Some day you will see and understand.

(kkboldt;65685)
(Jordan;65679)
Kim, you just couldn't see. Angels have free will as well as human does. Satan had free will, and he chose himself over God. (Isaiah 14:12-16, Ezekiel 28) It was abomination to God for spirit person (Satan / Leader of Fallen Angels) to have sex with a flesh (human) woman. (Eve)The same is true in Genesis 6. It was abomination to God for spirit people (fallen angels) to marry flesh women. (Genesis 6:2) That is the reason why God needed to bring down the flood.
I disagree, Jordan, that those passages are referring to Satan or Fallen angels. So your argument is a moot point.There is nothing in the Bible that states "Satan is a fallen angel". There is nothing in the Bible that states angels are supernatural beings (spirit people) created by God, EXCEPT for the "Angel of the Lord" which is a theophany of God himself.There is nothing in the Bible that states "angels have free will", unless you use the HUMAN understanding. Then, yes, angels have free will.All the original Hebrew and Greek languages indicate that angels are HUMAN, "messengers", kings, priests, rulers, judges, shepherds. HUMANS. Nothing in the original languages indicates "supernatural or extraterrestrial beings."This is one of the most misunderstood and misinterpreted subjects of the Bible today and has created countless fierce arguments and dismay between Christians.I don't think anyone fully understands just what an "angel" really is. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.KimEzekiel 28:14 - Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.Ezekiel 28:13 - Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.H3742 - keruwb1) cherub, cherubim (pl)a) an angelic being1) as guardians of Eden2) as flanking God's throne3) as an image form hovering over the Ark of the Covenant4) as the chariot of Jehovah (fig.)

(tomwebster;65686)
Kim,What Bible do you read? Have you read the whole book? Do you understand what you are reading? Do you know anything about the First earth age? Do you know where we come from? :study: It's all in the BOOK if you would read it with understanding, but them, maybe now isn't your time! Some day you will see and understand.
Oh, Tom, believe me, for the first 10 years of my Bible study, I studied what you and others are putting forth here, I believed it and defended it sometimes mercilessly. But upon further study with God opening my eyes, then delving deeper into the original languages and having a full understanding of the use of parable and figure of speech in the Bible—another 10 years later, I came to my conclusions, and I don't take them lightly. I've also studied the non-canonical books and the Apocryphal books. My favorite Bible is the KJV. But I've cross-referenced other translations. I have access to many concordances and lexicons here, too, where I work. Of course, my favorite is The New Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew, Chaldee, and Greek dictionary and the accompanying Hebrew and Greek lexicons.I understand very well what I'm reading. More so, than ever before in my life. I pray God will open your mind to these understandings as well, someday.Look, I'm not the first or the last Christian who studies the Bible to come to these conclusions. I see there are others here who have seen what I have seen.I believe we've all been misled throughout our lives as to what or who angels really are and just who Satan really is and what his role is.And no, i'm not "spiritualizing" anything away. The art to understanding the Bible is to let the Bible show you what is to be taken at full literal face value, or what is to be taken as "parable" or figure of speech and metaphor. Jesus resurrected from the dead. That was definitely "literal"! E.W. Bullinger put forth a book, which my company has re-published, entitled, "Figures of Speech" used in the Bible. For those Bullinger fans, you'll be quite surprised as to what Bullinger's conclusions were on many things. I fought with God on this, I argued with myself and others for years. Then one day, the light-bulb went on inside this head of mine and I saw the truth. I read the Bible again, and there it was before my eyes. It made perfect sense to me. I'm sure what you believe right now makes perfect sense to you? But is it the absolute truth? Are you really finished learning?Well, why should you believe me, anyway? You'll have to go through it yourself to see.You can read the whole Bible over and over again for years, and every time you do, you'll learn something new. It never ends.We ALL THINK we have it, or know everything the Bible has to teach. But do we really?I found out I did not, and I am willing to admit it. Kim

Kim,So be it! Your eye must be better than mine Oh, well!

(Christina;65696)
What do you think God is talking about when he says there were giants in land in those days are you so naiive to believe in the middle of God Words his letter to all mankind he takes time out to discuss Tall people????????? What about us short people ????????? To use Gods Words here be not ignorant of these things. Gen 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.Num 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, [which come] of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. Deu 2:11 Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims. Deu 2:20 (That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims; Deu 3:11 For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants; behold, his bedstead [was] a bedstead of iron; [is] it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits [was] the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man. Deu 3:13 And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, [being] the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants. Jos 12:4 And the coast of Og king of Bashan, [which was] of the remnant of the giants, that dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei, Jos 13:12 All the kingdom of Og in Bashan, which reigned in Ashtaroth and in Edrei, who remained of the remnant of the giants: for these did Moses smite, and cast them out. Jos 15:8 And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same [is] Jerusalem: and the border went up to the top of the mountain that [lieth] before the valley of Hinnom westward, which [is] at the end of the valley of the giants northward: Jos 17:15 And Joshua answered them, If thou [be] a great people, [then] get thee up to the wood [country], and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee.Jos 18:16 And the border came down to the end of the mountain that [lieth] before the valley of the son of Hinnom, [and] which [is] in the valley of the giants on the north, and descended to the valley of Hinnom, to the side of Jebusi on the south, and descended to Enrogel, Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among themJob 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. Job 1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that [there is] none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? Job 1:12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath [is] in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD. Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. Giants - nĕphiyl1) giants, the Nephilim... from the root word -naphal meaning1) to fall, lie, be cast down, fail1) to fallAs in they kept not thier own estate Jud 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. ....................................................................................Understand I am not trying to be rude or condesending here but If you do not understand these verses and what they mean you do not belong in the deeper studies area thats why we started this area so members that can understand these deeper teaching beyond the milk can study them with like believers without these milk toast arguments. You are free to debate these things but please start a thread in the regular discussion area opinions are not scripture study and are subject to be deleted in this deeper study forum thread (see rules)[url="http://www.christianityboard.com/rules-deeper-study-forum-t9071.html]http://www.christianityboard.com/rules-dee...orum-t9071.html[/url]
Hi Christine,All these things that you and others have put forth here are "opinion". It's what we choose to believe in the end, is it not?Here's my understanding of the word "giant" or Nephylim from the New Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible:According to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, 1984 ed., the word Nephilim is derived from the word nephiyl pronounced, nef-feel, meaning a bully or tyrant. This is the real meaning of the word giant as it was used in the context of Genesis 6:4. The word giant does not mean “super-human” or someone of “large stature” at all. It means a tyrant or mighty man, man of reknown. Those men who oppressed and beat their subjects into submission. “Nimrod, the mighty hunter before the Lord,” is a good example. He was all powerful in his day. And he ruled with an “iron fist”. He was the “giant” of his day. The word “giant” is used in the figurative sense in modern times for “the giants of their industry” and we know that is a “figure of speech” and not to be taken at literal face value. So why would we believe that there was literally a whole race of men around 9 cubits tall?Another Hebrew word for “giant” is gibbor (used in Numbers and Deuteronomy) which means “powerful, warrior, tyrant, champion, chief, valiant man, or mighty man. Again, it does not mean a very large man of tall stature.The word nephiyl is taken from the Hebrew word nephal. Nephal has a variety of meanings: among those are “fallen, abortion (untimely death), to be cast out or cast down, a falling away, fugitive, inferior, to be judged, loss of light (as in the light of wisdom), overthrown, overwhelm, perish, to be smitten.”In the case of Numbers 13:33 (NKJV “And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, [which come] of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.”Let's look at the context in which this was stated. First of all, those whom Moses sent out to spy on the sons of Anak didn't want to go. And when they went, they came back and exaggerated the size of the warriors (sons of Anak) because they didn't want to fight them. They were being "cowards". That's why God became angry with them because they were attempting to slide out of having to fight the sons of Anak. They were "whining".... "we were as grasshoppers!" So they exaggerated to get out of having to fight them. Yes, people did exaggerate in those days. Again, why do you think God became angry with them?In case of King Og, it was King Og's BED that was nine cubits, NOT King Og himself. I challenge you to find that it was King Og who was 9 cubits tall. King Og is referred to as a "giant", yes, and the word "gibbor" is used there in the Hebrew which means “powerful, warrior, tyrant, champion, chief, valiant man, or mighty man. Again, it does not mean a very large man of tall stature.There is only ONE man in the Bible who is described as being 9 cubits tall, and that was Goliath. He was literally a "giant". Why? Because it says he was 9 cubits tall. HOWEVER, again, were the Israelites exaggerating like they did in Moses's day? That's not to take away from what King David did in killing Goliath. He was a BIG man. I know we'd all like to believe there was this "race of giants that were over 9 cubits tall" but the Bible doesn't support this.I know this will be met with opposition. But this IS what the Hebrew language states.They used figurative language back then just like we use today. When we use the phrase, "he is a giant in his industry". Or as in the movie Star Trek, when referring to the great writers of the 1970s, "ah yes, the giants!" It's figure of speech.We still use it today as figure of speech. That is how the English language works. That is how the ancient Hebrews/Israelites spoke. That is why Jesus spoke in parables. We still speak this way today. Why? Because we are their descendants.WHO WERE/ARE THE SONS OF GOD?The Sons of God were the Children of Adam and Seth as indicated in the New Testament. In the book of Luke, chapter 3, we find the genealogy of Jesus. Luke 3:38 “Which was [the son] of Enos, which was [the son] of Seth, which was [the son] of Adam, which was [the son] of God.” Here we see that “Adam” was the “son of God”. If Adam was a son of God, then does it stand to reason that his offspring through Seth are also “sons of God”?Jesus promised us that if we follow him and walk in his ways: John 1:12 “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:” Romans 8:14 “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” Those who are “led by the Spirit of God” are the “sons of God”.In Genesis 4:26 “And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.” When “men began to call upon the name of the Lord, is when mankind walked in the Spirit of God. Therefore, by the New Testament understanding, they were the “sons of God.”There's more, but this is quite a bit to chew on for now.Don't you see? WE ARE the Sons of God! We HUMANS who walk in the Spirit of God!Kim

This is just amaze me... it's just sickening to my heart to hear such lies...Jeremiah 1:5 - Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.Kim, we were spirits before we became human. But I will not let a lie go unchallenge. In fact, I'll just create a topic for you Kim, because I know you want to debate it.

I am not going to waste my time arguing with you, Kim, someday you will know. For now we will disagree. They are coming back and they like us humans.

(Jordan;65705)
This is just amaze me... it's just sickening to my heart to hear such lies...Jeremiah 1:5 - Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.Kim, we were spirits before we became human. But I will not let a lie go unchallenge. In fact, I'll just create a topic for you Kim, because I know you want to debate it.
To suggest I'm "lying" is awfully strong accusation even for a Christian, don't you think?To what end would I lie?And how do you conclude that that we were "spirits" before we became human? We were "God-breathed" were we not? Did not God breathe the breath of life into Adam and he became a "living soul"? Was not Adam formed from the dust of the earth?Is not the "soul" the "life" thereof? Is it not what animates us?And is it not "the soul that sins dies"?If we were made to be spirits, then why did God give us a body? Why bother?Why did God bother to become a human and die for us on the cross? Why did Jesus resurrect from the dead in a physical body in which Thomas placed his hands into the wounds of the risen Christ? And he cried, "My LORD and MY GOD!"After all of this, you believe we were spirits before we became human? Adam and Eve may have "walked in the spirit of God" before they sinned, but they were "flesh". "And they were naked, but were not ashamed."Kim

Fallen Angels/Giants (Debate Topic)Kim, I'm not going to answer your post in this Deeper Study Forum. Do it over the thread I created it for you. I will answer your post over that thread, but not here.

At Matthew 13, Jesus gave an illustration in which he expected the Christian congregation that he established and became operative on Pentecost 33 C.E., to apostasize (Greek [a·po·sta·si′a] ) and comes from the verb a·phi′ste·mi, literally meaning “stand away from", with the noun having the sense of “desertion, abandonment or rebellion".

In this illustration about wheat and weeds, at Matthew 13:24-30, Jesus foretold that true religion would be virtually obscured for a time. Jesus sowed a field with wheat, “the fine seed,” which pictured his faithful disciples who would make up the original Christian congregation. He warned that “an enemy,” Satan the Devil, would in time oversow the wheat field with “weeds”—people who professed to follow Jesus Christ but who in fact rejected his teachings.

Very soon after the death of Jesus’ apostles, individuals appeared who proved to be “weeds,” favoring twisted human teachings over “the very word of Jehovah.” (Jeremiah 8:8, 9; Acts 20:29, 30) As a consequence, a perverted, counterfeit Christianity appeared on the world stage. It was dominated by what the Bible calls “the lawless one”—a corrupt clergy class that was itself steeped in “every unrighteous deception.” (2 Thessalonians 2:6-10) Jesus foretold that this situation would change “in the conclusion of the system of things.” The wheatlike Christians would be collected together in unity and “the weeds” would eventually be destroyed.(Matt 13:40)

It is this counterfeit Christianity that bears responsibility for the “centuries of unredeemed barbarism” and spiritual darkness that enveloped Christendom in the centuries that followed. Foreseeing this and all the other depraved and violent acts done since then in the name of religion, the apostle Peter rightly predicted that “on account of these [professed Christians] the way of the truth [would] be spoken of abusively.” (2 Peter 2:1, 2)

Soon after the death of the apostles, apostate teachers from within the congregation began to take control of it. They spoke “twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.” (Acts 20:29, 30) As a result, many Christians ‘fell away from the faith.’ They were “turned aside to false stories.” (1 Timothy 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 4:3, 4)

By the fourth century C.E., says The New Dictionary of Theology, “Catholic Christianity had become the official . . . religion of the Roman Empire.” There was a “coalescence of ecclesial and civil society”—a merging of Church and State that was diametrically opposed to the beliefs of the early Christians. (John 17:16; James 4:4) The same source states that in time, the whole structure and nature of the church, as well as many of its fundamental beliefs, was changed radically “under the influence of a curious and thoroughly unhealthy combination of O[ld] T[estament] and neoplatonic models.” As predicted by Jesus Christ, his genuine disciples were hidden from sight as counterfeit Christians flourished, being deeply influenced by Greek philosophy and other pagan teachings.

The apostle Paul foretold something else that would mark this counterfeit religious system. He wrote: “Let no one seduce you in any manner, because [Jehovah’s day] will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed.” (2 Thessalonians 2:2-4) This “man of lawlessness” is none other than the clergy class that exalted itself into a ruling position over the “Christian” congregation.

The apostasy started in the apostle Paul’s day. It accelerated once the apostles died and their restraining influence disappeared. It would be marked, said Paul, by “the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents and with every unrighteous deception.” (2 Thessalonians 2:6-12) How accurately that describes the activities of so many religious leaders throughout history !

Augustine (354 C.E.-430 C.E.), to whom the Catholic church has made a "saint" and pre-eminent Doctor of the Church, and the patron of the Augustinian religious order, "was heavily influenced by the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus (205 C.E.- 270 C.E.)".(Wikipedia, Encarta Encyclopedia) He therefore based his "concepts" on the teachings of Plato and earlier Platonists, who taught that the soul is immortal and separate from the body, and not on the "healthful" teachings of the Bible.(1 Tim 6:3) Is this "hellenized" (Greek) form of "truth" acceptable to God ? To the contrary, it fulfills what Jesus said at Matthew 13:24-30 in the illustration of the "wheat and weeds", that the Christianity that Jesus established would be corrupted and Augustine was just one of a long list of so-called "Christians" or "Church Fathers" that corrupted the pure teachings of the Christ.

In support of their claim that Roman Catholicism is the one true church, Catholic leaders say that their bishops have “a life-giving contact with the original apostles by a current of succession which goes back to the beginning.” In truth, this claim of apostolic succession has no historical or Scriptural basis. There is no credible evidence that the church system that arose following the death of Jesus’ apostles was ever directed by God’s holy spirit.(Romans 8:9; Galatians 5:19-21)

And what of the other churches that sprang up following the so-called Reformation? Did they return to the model of the early Christian congregation? Did they restore the purity of the original Christian congregation? It is true that following the Reformation, the Bible became available to many of the common people in their own language. Yet, history shows that these churches continued to teach erroneous doctrines, such as immortality of the soul, hellfire, the trinity, the use of icons in worship.(Matthew 15:7-9)

where in the scriptures does it state that Cain is the son of satan and eve?
scriptures do state that Cain is adam and eves' son.

Well if course they are, there isn't really evidence in scripture that supports any other race was created at the time of Adam. And Adam is a descriptive term used to describe someone that can basically 'blush', one you can see blood through their skin. Look at most Caucasians... Tell me what you can see.

You have to remember that the fallen angels would have been on earth probably before Adam, and this may explain the fossils of cro-magnon peoples. They were larger than we were and had more cranial capacity, but , they were very similar to the caucasoid structure. We know from Gen 6 that these angels slept with the daughters of Adam and gave them children. There is a very detailed account to be found in the Book of Enoch. Accept that as you may, it holds complete relevance with Christianity.

And the book of Job is contended to have taken place BEFORE the flood of Noah. Also, there is a ton of material to be found on the 'beasts of the field' during the beast creation account. Odd how these beasts had 'hands' and wore clothing. Besides the fact that Israel was commanded that if a woman or man were to lay with a beast, they were to be killed. Being that the majority of people today aren't attracted to animals in anyway, there is no way that they would have been then. So what is the beast exactly? Like I said, a good self study will yield a lot of results.

Jo-Nathan said:

where in the scriptures does it state that Cain is the son of satan and eve?
scriptures do state that Cain is adam and eves' son.

Click to expand...

Read the serpent account carefully, do a word study, you will find that Eve was seduced and the serpent was an enchanting person, a whisperer of secrets.

Also, Cain isn't mentioned in Adams genealogy listed in Gen 5:1.

To me the entire creation account is the first parable.