Kenite/Flood

[tim-from-pa]

Let's recap some things about lineages of man and what I found.

1. Pre-Adamic man: I could believe in such (or 'man-like' beings) between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 before the world became a waste and desolation (some believe, as I do that Lucifer was reigning over this earth then and this was the result of his rebellion). However, after verse 2 is a recreation where everything before then was destroyed, and the bible and apocryphal sources simply call it "creation" because this was where man (I mean Adam in this sense) was created to become as God and take over the job so-to-speak for the new earth (or 2nd earth age). As for races after Genesis 1:2 yet before Adam in this creative process of the 2nd age, I'm having a dickens of a time truly believing the bible is teaching that, and I struggle to find one apocryphal source that says it, including Josephus. I use apocryphal sources like Enoch, Jubilees and Jashar that I have to shed light on difficult passages in Genesis. If I go to Strong's all the Hebrew word for man in all cases is adam. If there was a generic man before Adam, then why not iysh? In addition, the bible itself calls the "adam" in chapter one "Adam" (capital A) and the Adamic race was in addition created in God's image according to later passages in the bible, unless that was a translation error.

If we are to make a distinction between "create" and "form", then we must also make a distinction between what was promised to each lineage of man in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. It does not say that Adam was created in God's image. But it does say (unlike Genesis one) that Adam became a living soul. Does that mean that the men in chapter one have no souls, but at least look like God? In addition, only the men in chapter one were told to have dominion over the earth, but not Adam in chapter two (he has a garden instead)? Yet, since the bible teaches that the Adamic race have all those privileges in both chapters, then it becomes like mathematics to me where if A=B and B=C, then A=C. I'm still seeing it as one race of Adam, sorry I can't see past that.

2. Satan's Seed. I understand that some apocryphal sources teach that, as it is in my Jewish encyclopedia although I have yet to find even one source on my own. The bible can be interpreted several ways on this, and I use such sources (the majority teachings of them) seem to be that Cain was Adam's son (more on that shortly)

3. Genesis 6 incident with "sons of God": Again, the bible strongly hints these are angelic beings, but virtually all the apocryphal sources agree theses were fallen angels, so that is my take on "Serpent Seed"-like doctrines and for me that clinches that decision. However, these offspring became abominable giants so if Cain were really Satan's Seed, I would reasonably assume the same (which they are supposedly not, so that I am scratching my head over). However, these would have been washed away in the flood. Demonic entities tried to ruin the line of Adam and my take is that by doing so would give Satan his own race of beings to allow this fallen creature called man to take over the earth once again to give Satan control like he once had.

4. Flood. I am likewise reading in all sources I found that this was world-wide. If it were not, then the assumption would be an ineffectual God who could not wipe out all the evil created by these hybrids, which was the reason for the flood to begin with. Later we will have the Tribulation, and I always believed that was likewise world-wide.

Just my recaps of what I found and believe so far.

 

[(THE)]

WOW what interesting student you are.....

Ok lets review.....But first I would like to say,,,its seems you have come across the things I believe,,,but you dont nessecarily believe them,,,,anyhow lets review....

Pre-Adamic man: I could believe in such (or 'man-like' beings) between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 before the world became a waste and desolation (some believe, as I do that Lucifer was reigning over this earth then and this was the result of his rebellion).

When Lucifer reigned,,,,,of course there was no flesh man,,,,thus everyone was a spirirual being......

As for races after Genesis 1:2 yet before Adam in this creative process of the 2nd age, I'm having a dickens of a time truly believing the bible is teaching that, and I struggle to find one apocryphal source that says it, including Josephus.

I would say we need to discuss the word "man" as it is being used in Genesis 1:26.....

If we are to make a distinction between "create" and "form", then we must also make a distinction between what was promised to each lineage of man in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. It does not say that Adam was created in God's image. But it does say (unlike Genesis one) that Adam became a living soul. Does that mean that the men in chapter one have no souls, but at least look like God? In addition, only the men in chapter one were told to have dominion over the earth, but not Adam in chapter two (he has a garden instead)? Yet, since the bible teaches that the Adamic race have all those privileges in both chapters, then it becomes like mathematics to me where if A=B and B=C, then A=C. I'm still seeing it as one race of Adam, sorry I can't see past that.

I dont think we need to make a distinction between "create" and "form" ,,,,I think God is making this for us..........I will put the hebrew to the side and just look at it from pure fact (kinda like a detective)

alright,,,,note,,,,,

In Genesis 1 God CREATED man,,,,,,In Genesis 2 God FORMED Adam....

In Genesis 1 God CREATED animals for the created man,,,but in Genesis 2 God FORMED animals for Adam......

In Genesis 1 GOd gave created man the earth.....In Genesis 2 God gave Adam a pardise/garden....

In Genesis 1 GOd didnt tell the created man about the tree of evil (satan) but in Genesis 2 God told Adam not to mess with the tree (satan)

In Genesis 1 God CREATED male and female,,,,In Genesis 2 God actually put Adam down,, to form her form Adam himself.....

What we are seing here is God taking one man and seperatiing him,,,,because this will be the man (eth-ha-adam) that Christ comes through,,,,,,,,this is also why God told Adam about the the tree (satan) God new satan would attack Adam before the other races,,,, because ,,,satan knew Christ was coming through Adam...............'

YOu mentioned some things I didnt get to touch on ,,,,,,so I will check in probably later tonight if not 2morrow.........


.

 

[JudaicChristian]

[quote="tim_from_pa":37ul8z5w]

5By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations

Been working lately and finally got back to the board here.

I always took that verse to mean Japheth's future descendants in the farthest parts of the earth as well after Babel as the word "nations" used for them in the last part of the chapter is the same Hebrew word (meaning nations or Gentiles). The very same word is used of Ephraim in Genesis 48:19. Yair Davidiy calls Joseph the "Gentile children of Israel" considering Joseph married Asenath, the daughter of Potipherah, priest of On.

I can sort of see where you are coming from, but I think just the word "gentiles" is definitely not a strong enough case for them to be anyone other than Noah's descendants (Genesis 10:1, Acts 17:26) especially since the word is used of the chosen lineage of Naoh.

But then we are left with a huge problem.......Noah and his were family were pure adamics from Adam.....

119 'adam aw-dam' to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:--be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).

So adam was a white man that was able to blush and show red in the face (you can google ruddy face)

Which mean Noah and his family were Ruddy (white)

SO if there were only eight ruddy (white) people in the world,,,,,how do you explain other races?????

2 white poeple cant have a black baby ,,,,nor a chinese baby ,,,,nor a mexican child.....

If its tru that only 8 people were on the ark,,,all of the same race and there is no other race on the planet,,,,then it would be immpossible to make another race.......

check it out,,,

Gen. 10:13 And Mizraim begat Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, and Naphtuhim

Mizraim,,,means eygpt in ancient hebrew.........Mizrain was the father of the eygptians,,,,back to the same problem,,,,,How can one get an eygptian man from 2 adamic ruddy people,,,,,you cant,,,,I believe the people on the coastlands had been there for some time,,,,which would bring us back to Genesis 1:26 the creating of the races......[/quote:37ul8z5w]
Noah was the first white man born.

 

[JudaicChristian]

Have you guys ever bothered to look up the word Satan? There are many Satans and Anti-Christ.

 

[(THE)]

Noah was the first white man born

Naoh was ruddy (white) because his father Lamech was white...........

Lamech was white because his father Methuselah was white.............

Methuselah was white because his father was and his father and his father all the way to Adam.....

YOu say Noah was the first white man huh??????????

Well I ask you this then,,,,,,,,,what color was Noahs parents???????,,,,,,,trapped

Have you guys ever bothered to look up the word Satan? There are many Satans and Anti-Christ.
Have you guys ever bothered to look up the word Satan? There are many Satans and Anti-Christ.

No----There are many antichrist,,,but there is only one satan..............

 

[Caroline H]

2. Satan's Seed. I understand that some apocryphal sources teach that, as it is in my Jewish encyclopedia although I have yet to find even one source on my own. The bible can be interpreted several ways on this, and I use such sources (the majority teachings of them) seem to be that Cain was Adam's son (more on that shortly)

3. Genesis 6 incident with "sons of God": Again, the bible strongly hints these are angelic beings, but virtually all the apocryphal sources agree theses were fallen angels, so that is my take on "Serpent Seed"-like doctrines and for me that clinches that decision. However, these offspring became abominable giants so if Cain were really Satan's Seed, I would reasonably assume the same (which they are supposedly not, so that I am scratching my head over). However, these would have been washed away in the flood. Demonic entities tried to ruin the line of Adam and my take is that by doing so would give Satan his own race of beings to allow this fallen creature called man to take over the earth once again to give Satan control like he once had.

3 - No active promotion of other Faiths is allowed:

You will not post any messages; links, images or photos that promote a religion or belief other than Biblical and historical Christianity (atheism is considered a "belief" for the purposes of this rule). Discussing these doctrines are fine, as long as the beliefs are not actively promoted. This includes Universal Reconciliation, Universal Salvation, Serpent seed, Dual Seed or Two-Seedline doctrine which are only allowed in the 1 on 1 Debate Forum. This is a Christian Forum as the name suggests.

Naoh was ruddy (white) because his father Lamech was white...........

Lamech was white because his father Methuselah was white.............

Methuselah was white because his father was and his father and his father all the way to Adam.....

YOu say Noah was the first white man huh??????????

Well I ask you this then,,,,,,,,,what color was Noahs parents???????,,,,,,,trapped

Not sure where this discussion is going, or what the purpose for this is

 

[(THE)]

Not sure where this discussion is going, or what the purpose for this is

Maybe your just unprepared to take place in this kind of a discussion,,,,,,,the discussion will tell why I believe the flood of Noah,,,was not worldwide,,,also showing that Adam was not the first man ,,,and there were people on the earth when Noah got of the ark..........on another note...

So you ever going to get around to telling me why the faithful followers of God (sons of God) were doing hanging aroung satan??????????

 

[researcher]

Discussing these doctrines are fine, as long as the beliefs are not actively promoted. This includes Universal Reconciliation, Universal Salvation, Serpent seed,

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

Joh 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;....
Joh 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

Doesn't the Bible say the Serpent had seed? Lol. No promoting belief in the Bible here, guys, lol. Honestly, what's gotten into you guys. Serpent seed n all that, lol.

 

[(THE)]

So even though God says the serpent has a seed,,,,were not allowed to tell someone that......GOd was right,,,,traditons of men make void the word of God,,,,,,so much that we cant even tell people the serpent has a seed EVEN THOUGH GOD SAID IT FIRST......

 

[westtexas]

2. Satan's Seed. I understand that some apocryphal sources teach that, as it is in my Jewish encyclopedia although I have yet to find even one source on my own. The bible can be interpreted several ways on this, and I use such sources (the majority teachings of them) seem to be that Cain was Adam's son (more on that shortly)
.

I won't interrupt y'alls conversation but I think the Bible is very clear on this one.
Genesis 4:1--Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain (NKJV)
Somewhere back in this thread, or maybe a different one on angels, (THE) gave us a lesson on the meaning of knew, so I won't get into it again but I don't see how you can interpret the Bible except for one way here.
Westtexas

 

[researcher]

I think you have to look at a few things, and then start asking questions about what it means.

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

OK, where is the Serpent's (Satan's) "seed" at this point? Is it (they etc) in existence yet?

I don't see any mention of his "seed" yet, so I will assume that there were none as of that point.

So what's next?

Gen 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

OK, so, Cain is born.

Side note: Many commentators puzzle over the original Hebrew which can also read, "I have gotten a man, the Lord."

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
"Cain, ???, signifies acquisition; hence Eve says ???? kanithi, I have gotten or acquired a man, ?? ???? eth Yehovah, the Lord. It is extremely difficult to ascertain the sense in which Eve used these words, which have been as variously translated as understood. Most expositors think that Eve imagined Cain to be the promised seed that should bruise the head of the serpent."

From the Hebrew, it may be saying, "I have gotten a man, the Lord." Opinion goes back and forth between commentators.

So, we have Cain now. Let's see if we have some "Serpent seed" yet...

1Jn 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
1Jn 3:12 not as Cain-he was from the evil [one] and slew his brother. And for what reason did he slay him? Because his works were evil, but those of his brother [were] righteous. (Analytical/Literal Translation)

What's that word "from" there in 1 John 3:12?

Strong's
From
G1537
A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): ...

OK, so, here we have Cain, who, John says originates from or is "from" Satan.

So, the question is, how did Cain become "of" the evil one? Did the devil put a demon in him? If Cain was "from" the devil, how did he come "from" him?

He obviously started killing right away, so, he's obviously not from God, lol.

So, apparently Cain is the first "seed" of the Serpent (devil) as John says.

So, how'd he get that way? lol.

 

[(THE)]

2. Satan's Seed. I understand that some apocryphal sources teach that, as it is in my Jewish encyclopedia although I have yet to find even one source on my own. The bible can be interpreted several ways on this, and I use such sources (the majority teachings of them) seem to be that Cain was Adam's son (more on that shortly)
.

I won't interrupt y'alls conversation but I think the Bible is very clear on this one.
Genesis 4:1--Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain (NKJV)
Somewhere back in this thread, or maybe a different one on angels, (THE) gave us a lesson on the meaning of knew, so I won't get into it again but I don't see how you can interpret the Bible except for one way here.
Westtexas

Thats not interrupting,,,and its a good point.......But I believe the answer is simple.......

First note,,,,If Cain was the son of Adam,,,he would be mentioned in the geneology of Adam,,but he is not....Genesis Chp 5........

Now lets look at you verse

Genesis 4:1--Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain

This is true,,,,,I agree 100% percent,,,,,,,,Adam had intercourse with Eve and she bare Cain,,,,the problem is someone else had already known her.........

How many time in todays society,,does a man sleep with a woman,,,,,only to find out later the child that was born is not his???????

Also Researcher posted a couple of things that point to Cain being to son of the devil.......

Also let me share something I probably shouldnt........

Satan knew Christ was coming thru the womb of Eve,,,,,,So satan tried to pollute her womb/bloodline,,,,,what did satan say to Eve????????

I believe satan told Eve if she lyed with him she would have the Christ now...........

 

[(THE)]

I think you have to look at a few things, and then start asking questions about what it means.

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

OK, where is the Serpent's (Satan's) "seed" at this point? Is it (they etc) in existence yet?

I don't see any mention of his "seed" yet, so I will assume that there were none as of that point.

So what's next?

Gen 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

OK, so, Cain is born.

Side note: Many commentators puzzle over the original Hebrew which can also read, "I have gotten a man, the Lord."

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
"Cain, ???, signifies acquisition; hence Eve says ???? kanithi, I have gotten or acquired a man, ?? ???? eth Yehovah, the Lord. It is extremely difficult to ascertain the sense in which Eve used these words, which have been as variously translated as understood. Most expositors think that Eve imagined Cain to be the promised seed that should bruise the head of the serpent."

From the Hebrew, it may be saying, "I have gotten a man, the Lord." Opinion goes back and forth between commentators.

So, we have Cain now. Let's see if we have some "Serpent seed" yet...

1Jn 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
1Jn 3:12 not as Cain-he was from the evil [one] and slew his brother. And for what reason did he slay him? Because his works were evil, but those of his brother [were] righteous. (Analytical/Literal Translation)

What's that word "from" there in 1 John 3:12?

Strong's
From
G1537
A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): ...

OK, so, here we have Cain, who, John says originates from or is "from" Satan.

So, the question is, how did Cain become "of" the evil one? Did the devil put a demon in him? If Cain was "from" the devil, how did he come "from" him?

He obviously started killing right away, so, he's obviously not from God, lol.

So, apparently Cain is the first "seed" of the Serpent (devil) as John says.

So, how'd he get that way? lol.

Cain got the way the same way Goliath got that way,,,,,a angel/cherub mating with a flesh woman.....

This is what I will never understand,,,,,,,most scholars and studying students realize that the fallen angels in Gen 6 sleep with flesh woman.........But why is it a problem when someone brings up the notion that the head fallen angel did the same thing.........

satan is the leader of the fallen angels,,,,where do you think the fallen angels get there ideas??????????

 

[westtexas]

Thats not interrupting,,,and its a good point.......But I believe the answer is simple.......

First note,,,,If Cain was the son of Adam,,,he would be mentioned in the geneology of Adam,,but he is not....Genesis Chp 5........

Now lets look at you verse

Genesis 4:1--Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain

This is true,,,,,I agree 100% percent,,,,,,,,Adam had intercourse with Eve and she bare Cain,,,,the problem is someone else had already known her.........

How many time in todays society,,does a man sleep with a woman,,,,,only to find out later the child that was born is not his???????

A couple of quick points and I'l have to get back with you tomorrow. 4 A.M. comes early. You have made 2 points and I don't agree with either one of them. You state Cain is not Adam's son merely because he is not mentioned in Gen. 5. The lineage in this chapter goes from Adam to Seth and on down to Noah as a preliminary to chapter 6 and the flood. This lineage is the lineage of Noah and not inclusive of all of Adam's family. Gen. 5:4--"and he had sons and daughters"

Your second point I also disagree with also. Life happens in a logical order. Scripture says Adam knew his wife and she conceived. It doesn't say she conceived and then Adam knew her.
Let me know what you think, Westtexas

 

[(THE)]

Thats not interrupting,,,and its a good point.......But I believe the answer is simple.......

First note,,,,If Cain was the son of Adam,,,he would be mentioned in the geneology of Adam,,but he is not....Genesis Chp 5........

Now lets look at you verse

Genesis 4:1--Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain

This is true,,,,,I agree 100% percent,,,,,,,,Adam had intercourse with Eve and she bare Cain,,,,the problem is someone else had already known her.........

How many time in todays society,,does a man sleep with a woman,,,,,only to find out later the child that was born is not his???????

A couple of quick points and I'l have to get back with you tomorrow. 4 A.M. comes early. You have made 2 points and I don't agree with either one of them. You state Cain is not Adam's son merely because he is not mentioned in Gen. 5. The lineage in this chapter goes from Adam to Seth and on down to Noah as a preliminary to chapter 6 and the flood. This lineage is the lineage of Noah and not inclusive of all of Adam's family. Gen. 5:4--"and he had sons and daughters"

Your second point I also disagree with also. Life happens in a logical order. Scripture says Adam knew his wife and she conceived. It doesn't say she conceived and then Adam knew her.
Let me know what you think, Westtexas

Its like 2am where I am,,,,,,what am I doing up,,,,anyway,,, I will touch on this and return 2morrow...

You state Cain is not Adam's son merely because he is not mentioned in Gen. 5.

There are many reasons why I believe this I will share some real quick......

In Genesis 3,,,,,Eve covered her private areas.....Why ??????? Because in her mind,,,covering the area of sin could hide it.......but Eve decided she needed to hide her private area,,,,I thinks she just got done using that part of her body in her sin,,,,Adam too...

In Genesis 3,,, God cursed Eve's womb,,,,,,Why????? ,,,,,Because that is the part of the body she sinned with........

In Genesis 3 God also told Eve,,, her desire shall be for her husband,,,,,,why????? ,,,Because Eve had just desired another man,,,not her husband........

In Genesis 3,,,,God put enmity between satans seed,,,,that word "seed" means children,,,literal children from sperm.......

2231 zirmah zir-maw' feminine of 2230; a gushing of fluid (semen):--issue.
zera` zeh'-rah from 2232; seed; figuratively, fruit, plant, sowing-time, posterity:--X carnally, child, fruitful, seed(-time), sowing- time.

In Genesis 3 Eve said she was "beguiled" this word beguiled means sexually seduced......(more on this if needed)

"beguiled" in the Strong's Greek dictionary is # 1818; "exapatao, ex-ap-at ah-o, from 1537 and 538, to seduce wholly, to beguile, deceive." In # 1537 we read; "ex, shows point of origin".

In Genesis 3 satan brung up the word "touch" this word "touch" means sex ...

touch" is # 5060 in the Strong's Hebrew dictionary. It reads; "Naga, neh-gah; a prime root, prop. to touch, i.e., lay the hand upon (for the purpose; euphemism, to lie with a woman), to reach, "

In Matthew 13 we read of the parable of the tares and about satans literal children....,,,,heres one insert,,,

38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one (satan);

In the gospel of John ,,,Jesus is talking to the children of the devil,,,,here is one insert.......

John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

1 John 3:12
Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

Also look at Genesis 4:1,,,,Eve said she got a man from the Lord????????? huh,,,,,what is she talking about ?????/Cain was surely not from or of the Lord.......Something is going on here,,,,,Eve has been tricked into allowing satan to tamper with the wound that would bring forth the Messiah....

whooo I better hit the sack,,,il get at you 2morrow bro.....

 

[stovebolts]

The Kenites are simply the offspring of Cain,,,or better known as the "Sons of Cain"

In Genesis 6 we see a flood that wiped out everyone except Noah and his family......

SO that would mean all the "Sons of Cain" should be wiped out,,,because of the flood.....

But they arent the bible mentions these "Kenites" or "Sons of Cain" many times after the flood.....

SO how did the "Kenites" survive the flood????????????

Im thinking the flood of Noah was not worldwide..........................

The,
I would be more than willing to engage in a discussion with you on this...

The Kenites are simply the offspring of Cain,,,or better known as the "Sons of Cain"

Your first premise is abberated... Simply put,
Joshua 15:55-56 Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and Juttah, And Jezreel, and Jokdeam, and Zanoah,

Joshua 15:57 Cain, Gibeah, and Timnah; ten cities with their villages:

As the text explains, Cain is a city...
Cain from Strongs:
the same as 7013 (with a play upon the affinity to 7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe:--Cain, Kenite(-s).

1 Chron 2:55
And the families of scholars, those who dwelt with Jabez: Tirathites, Shimathites, Suchathites; they are the Kinites, who were descended from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.

You see, The Kinites = the people from the city of cain, were decendents of the people of the city of Hammath... It's really that simple.

Strongs Hammath:
a variation for the first part of 2576; hot springs; Chammath, a place in Palestine:--Hammath.

Thus, Hobab (Jg 4:11, Jethro, priest of Median (Ex. 3:1)) = Medianites from Abraham through his concubine (Gen 25)...

Numbers 10:29 And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel (Reuel, exodus 2) the Midianite, Moses' father in law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you: come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good concerning Israel.

Judges 4:11 Now Heber the Kenite, which was of the children of Hobab the father in law of Moses, had severed himself from the Kenites, and pitched his tent unto the plain of Zaanaim, which is by Kedesh.

Heber moves to Cain...


Should we proceed?...

 

[(THE)]

The Kenites are simply the offspring of Cain,,,or better known as the "Sons of Cain"

In Genesis 6 we see a flood that wiped out everyone except Noah and his family......

SO that would mean all the "Sons of Cain" should be wiped out,,,because of the flood.....

But they arent the bible mentions these "Kenites" or "Sons of Cain" many times after the flood.....

SO how did the "Kenites" survive the flood????????????

Im thinking the flood of Noah was not worldwide..........................

The,
I would be more than willing to engage in a discussion with you on this...

The Kenites are simply the offspring of Cain,,,or better known as the "Sons of Cain"

Your first premise is abberated... Simply put,
Joshua 15:55-56 Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and Juttah, And Jezreel, and Jokdeam, and Zanoah,

Joshua 15:57 Cain, Gibeah, and Timnah; ten cities with their villages:

As the text explains, Cain is a city...
Cain from Strongs:
the same as 7013 (with a play upon the affinity to 7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe:--Cain, Kenite(-s).

1 Chron 2:55
And the families of scholars, those who dwelt with Jabez: Tirathites, Shimathites, Suchathites; they are the Kinites, who were descended from Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.

You see, The Kinites = the people from the city of cain, were decendents of the people of the city of Hammath... It's really that simple.

Strongs Hammath:
a variation for the first part of 2576; hot springs; Chammath, a place in Palestine:--Hammath.

Thus, Hobab (Jg 4:11, Jethro, priest of Median (Ex. 3:1)) = Medianites from Abraham through his concubine (Gen 25)...

Numbers 10:29 And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel (Reuel, exodus 2) the Midianite, Moses' father in law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you: come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good concerning Israel.

Judges 4:11 Now Heber the Kenite, which was of the children of Hobab the father in law of Moses, had severed himself from the Kenites, and pitched his tent unto the plain of Zaanaim, which is by Kedesh.

Heber moves to Cain...


Should we proceed?...

Sure......Before we begin ,,,,What strongs concordance are you using???????? The reason I ask is because after 1991 the strongs was changed,,,and I believe there still making changes,,,,I dont think Dr strong's would have approved..........

any how one of the things that was removed is this

7017--patron. from 7014; a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin:--Kenite.

Ok so here is how it should be viewed,,,,,,when we look up the word "Cain" in the hebrew dictionary,,,we find,,,,,

7014-- the same as 7013 ( with a play upon the affinity of 7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also a place in Pal. and of an Oriental tribe: -Cain, Kenites.

This denotes the fact that we are speaking about a man (the first child) Cain....

That is why 7017 says a member of the tribe of Kajin which is Cain. Cain is the father of the kenites...........

 

[stovebolts]

We are using the same Strongs...

What your failing to see, is that 7014 is used in Genesis 4:1 (Cain, child of Adam and Eve) and in Joshua 15:57 where Cain is referred directly, and clearly as a City, begotten by another City. (1 Chron 2:55)

Using the Strongs you have provided, how do you work this city "Cain" into your theology since scripture clearly states that Cain is also the name of a city? (See my first response)

With this approach, there is no need to speculate on who was left behind, and who was taken in regard to the flood. Scripture is very clear, and without mystery that only 8 were saved.

 

[(THE)]

We are using the same Strongs...

What your failing to see, is that 7014 is used in Genesis 4:1 (Cain, child of Adam and Eve) and in Joshua 15:57 where Cain is referred directly, and clearly as a City, begotten by another City. (1 Chron 2:55)

Using the Strongs you have provided, how do you work this city "Cain" into your theology since scripture clearly states that Cain is also the name of a city? (See my first response)

With this approach, there is no need to speculate on who was left behind, and who was taken in regard to the flood. Scripture is very clear, and without mystery that only 8 were saved.

Im not talking about the city Cain,,,,,im talking about the man Cain,,,,,,,I am talking about the person that came out of the womb of Eve..........

When you look up the word "Cain" in the strongs concordance,,,it means,,, the same as 7013 (with the play upon the affinity to 7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe:-Cain, Kenites."

The name of the first child,,,,do you understand what the word "Cain" means now?????????

It means the first child,,,,,,it also can mean a place in palestine,,,,,but 7014 denotes the first child Cain,,,not a city.......

Now 7017 (1 Chron. 2:55) patron, from 7014: a Kenite or member of the tribe
of Kajin: Kenite.

SO lets make this simple........

When you look up the name "Cain" in the strongs concordance it tells you to go to page 103.....

When you go to pae 103 it tells you Cain,,,,was the first born,,,,and the kenites are members of his family........Also,,,you changing scripture bro,,,,look below

you said

What your failing to see, is that 7014 is used in Genesis 4:1 (Cain, child of Adam and Eve)

Genesis 4:1 does not say Cain is the son of Adam!!!! Genesis 4:1 says Adam had sex with his wife and she had a child..........The strongs concordance does not say Cain is the son of Adam,,,,it says Cain is the first son.......

Genesis 4:1 "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord."

All this says is Adam mated with Eve and she had a child,,,but I do not believe the child was Adams.......

With this approach, there is no need to speculate on who was left behind, and who was taken in regard to the flood. Scripture is very clear, and without mystery that only 8 were saved

O really,,,,,Cain has a bloodline that is mentionded in Gen 4 it is not the same bloodline mentioned in Gen 5.......Noah comes from Adam,,,,not Cain.........If only Noahs family survived the flood,,,then why can I read about Cains family years later?????????..........

 

[(THE)]

We are using the same Strongs...

What your failing to see, is that 7014 is used in Genesis 4:1 (Cain, child of Adam and Eve) and in Joshua 15:57 where Cain is referred directly, and clearly as a City, begotten by another City. (1 Chron 2:55)

Using the Strongs you have provided, how do you work this city "Cain" into your theology since scripture clearly states that Cain is also the name of a city? (See my first response)

With this approach, there is no need to speculate on who was left behind, and who was taken in regard to the flood. Scripture is very clear, and without mystery that only 8 were saved.

Im not talking about the city Cain,,,,,im talking about the man Cain,,,,,,,I am talking about the person that came out of the womb of Eve..........

When you look up the word "Cain" in the strongs concordance,,,it means,,, the same as 7013 (with the play upon the affinity to 7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe:-Cain, Kenites."

The name of the first child,,,,do you understand what the word "Cain" means now?????????

It means the first child,,,,,,it also can mean a place in palestine,,,,,but 7014 denotes the first child Cain,,,not a city.......

Now 7017 (1 Chron. 2:55) patron, from 7014: a Kenite or member of the tribe
of Kajin: Kenite.

SO lets make this simple........

When you look up the name "Cain" in the strongs concordance it tells you to go to page 103.....

When you go to pae 103 it tells you Cain,,,,was the first born,,,,and the kenites are members of his family........Also,,,you changing scripture bro,,,,look below

you said

What your failing to see, is that 7014 is used in Genesis 4:1 (Cain, child of Adam and Eve)

Genesis 4:1 does not say Cain is the son of Adam!!!! Genesis 4:1 says Adam had sex with his wife and she had a child..........The strongs concordance does not say Cain is the son of Adam,,,,it says Cain is the first son.......

Genesis 4:1 "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord."

All this says is Adam mated with Eve and she had a child,,,but I do not believe the child was Adams.......YOu do understand what a paternity test is,,,,usally this happens because a woman has sleep with 2 men around the same time and she/they dont know which is the father......

In Eves case she had twins......same mother 2 different fathers.....

[quote:hbcgks3e]With this approach, there is no need to speculate on who was left behind, and who was taken in regard to the flood. Scripture is very clear, and without mystery that only 8 were saved

O really,,,,,Cain has a bloodline that is mentionded in Gen 4 it is not the same bloodline mentioned in Gen 5.......Noah comes from Adam,,,,not Cain.........If only Noahs family survived the flood,,,then why can I read about Cains family years later?????????..........[/quote:hbcgks3e]