|
REPLY TO THREAD
|
|
Subject
|
Eve had sexual intercourse with the Serpent? In the Garden of Eden
|
|
User Name
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Font color:
Font:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original Message
|
A lot of the scriptures are types..ex: "trees of the fields clap their hands"...
Any of you brave theologians want to tackle this? Interesting stuff.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]
The Doctrine
The doctrine of the Serpent's Seed is followed by several minor Christian groups, the followers of Branhamism, Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists, and the Christian Identity Movement among others. There are variations and differences between these groups but the basic belief is that the Original Sin was an act of sexual intercourse between Adam and Eve and, prior to that act, Eve was sexually seduced by the serpent and committed sexual intercourse with the serpent; further, that Cain was conceived by the act with the serpent and Abel by the act with Adam.
The main variations are on the aftereffects of the act. Some proponents believe that the serpent was Satan himself.[12] Others believe that the serpent was an animal being influenced by Satan.[13] Another key difference is in the descendants of Cain. Some believe that the two lines remained separate and that eventually Cain's descendants were all destroyed, others believe that Cain's descendants became completely mixed with the descendants of Adam (meaning everyone has a piece of the genetics of the serpent),[14] and still others believe that the two lines remain separate to this day.[15] Finally others disagree whether sex itself was the original sin[16] or if the original sin was sex for pleasure rather than sex for reproduction.[17]
The following points and scriptures are largely agreed upon by all proponents to be the basis of the Serpent Seed doctrine, although variations do occur as mentioned above.
* The Two Trees. The starting point of the discussion is usually on the two trees, the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (Gen. 2:10). Proponents note the difference between the "trees that grow out the ground" as opposed to "the trees in the midst of the garden". This is used to indicate the two trees are not physical trees but principles (e.g. ideas, rules).[18][19] They also point to Rev. 2:7 and Rev. 22:2, where the Tree of Life is now in heaven to show that the two trees are not the same kind of trees that grow on Earth but instead are something spiritual. Furthermore they point out that since man was given the tree of knowledge by their choice it should still be visible somewhere in the world today, which they claim is the overt sexuality of society.
* The Serpent, Gen. 3. The serpent in its original form was a creature capable of speech, and it had not yet at that point been cursed to go "upon [its] belly"; thus some proponents claim that the "serpent" was originally an upright human-like creature.[20] Some proponents claim the serpent was intended to be used for manual labor and therefore was made to look like a man but was not given a soul.[21] The chapter states that the serpent "beguiled" Eve. In Early Modern English this word literally meant to seduce or lead astray.[22]
* Sex. In the bible sex was not called sex in any of Moses' writings. It was always referred to in cryptic ways such as "knowing". This is used as evidence that the trees and the fruit where just another cryptic way to describe sex.
* The Punishment, Gen. 3. Proponents also point to the punishment to show that the act was sexual. When Adam and Eve sinned they covered their genitals, not their mouths, indicating they sinned not with their mouths but with their genitals. The punishment God put on them also affected sexual reproduction: He caused the woman to have menstrual cycles and to have increased pain in childbirth. God's curse also put enmity between the descendants of Adam (e.g., Abel) and the descendants of the serpent (e.g., Abel's murderer Cain).[23]
* The Birth, Gen. 4. At the birth of Cain, Eve said "I have gotten a man from the Lord." Proponents claim that in the remaining two pre-Flood chapters, Adam's descendants are called the "sons of God", not "men",[24] while the word "men" refers solely to the descendants of Cain. Eve was also called "the mother of all living" (Gen. 3:20), but Adam was not similarly called "the father of all living".
* The Offspring, Gen. 4. Cain and Abel were of different occupational backgrounds. Abel tended the flocks and Cain tilled the ground. Proponents claim these traits were inherited from their fathers; Adam was to rule over the animals and the serpent was intended to tend the Garden of Eden. Another difference between them was that Abel, being of pure birth, knew how to give a proper sacrifice to God. Cain, not being pure, did not know how to give a proper sacrifice, he only knew he needed to give one, indicating he was only inherited a portion of the knowledge that Abel had inherited. His impurity was also displayed by his jealousy and murder of Abel, some proponents argue that these are not traits God would have created in Adam and Eve and could not have been inherited from them.
* The Two Lines of Descent. Gen. 4–5. Some proponents claim that because the two lines of descent are recorded separately it indicates they were somehow different. It notes how the developments in Cain's sides were all negative (e.g. Lamech's declaration in Gen. 4:23 that "I have slain a man to my wounding"[25]) But in Seth's line (Gen. 5) nothing is mentioned of anything evil, and each patriarch "begat sons and daughters". Ultimately, the two lines intermarry (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."), and God then destroyed the world with a flood.[26] Proponents also point to the biological principal of heterosis being evidenced in the offspring of the interbreeding of the two lines being giants.
* Christ. Ultimately Seth's line leads to Jesus, who was born of a virgin. Proponents point to the fact that all humanity was impure and therefore incapable of "breeding" a "pure" Son of God as the reason Christ had to be born of a virgin. Many proponents claim that Christ was born in the same state that Adam was created: perfect and without sin. They claim he had to be created by God in order for him to be pure and to be the "perfect sacrifice".[27][28][29]
[edit] William Branham's teachings
William Branham was not the first to preach the doctrine of serpent seed, but he was one of the major proponents of the doctrine in modern times. Branham was the most widely known minister of the 20th century to actually teach serpent seed and much of its spread can be attributed to him. William Branham taught that the fall of mankind resulted from Eve having sexual intercourse with an upright Beast whom Adam had named 'Serpent'.[30]
Because of his wide acclaim in the late 1940s and throughout the 1950s, Branham was widely followed in Charismatic and Pentecostal movements and to a lesser degree by Methodists and Baptists. His meetings, held all over the world, were attended by hundreds of thousands of people which gave him a very large audience. This popularity and influence gave him the best platform of all adherents of the serpent seed doctrine to spread it to the masses. Although he did not regularly espouse the doctrine in front of his largest audiences his belief in the doctrine was not kept secret and he did preach several sermons on it in smaller meetings.
Branham was well aware of the potential connections of the doctrine to racism but he tried to show that his belief was not racially targeted. ("He Cares, Do You Care?", 21 July 1963). He tried to show that although he believed the doctrine he did not think it was a basis for racism.
[edit] Is Serpent Seed a Heresy?
Most Christians and Jews do not believe the serpent seed doctrine based on Genesis 4:1 which states "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bore Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD,".
The Roman Catholic Church[31] and the Eastern Orthodox Church, the oldest communions, have never officially recognized the doctrine of serpent seed. Throughout history only fringe elements of Christianity have believed the doctrine of Serpent Seed. The creeds of Catholic Church make it very clear the original sin was the eating of a physical fruit, usually depicted as an apple. Teaching of serpent seed has been explicitly banned in both the Methodist and Baptist Christian Denominations.
Critics also point to Genesis 4:1 as denying that Cain was of the serpent because Eve states that Cain was "from the Lord".
|
|
Pictures (click to insert)
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | | | Next Page >> |
|
