The Origin of the Nibiru, Planet X Story

[Targaryen]

Talking about serpents lashing at Adam's decendants heels? you know like is normally read by, 99.999% of Christians.

 

[jgr]

Talking about serpents lashing at Adam's decendants heels? you know like is normally read by, 99.999% of Christians.

That's how you understand it?

 

[Targaryen]

Perhaps rather then playing at some strange game, you can explain how this passage from Genesis is somehow prophecy. After all, YOU are the one claiming so, not me.

 

[jgr]

Perhaps rather then playing at some strange game, you can explain how this passage from Genesis is somehow prophecy. After all, YOU are the one claiming so, not me.

I've claimed nothing. I've asked if it qualifies as prophecy, and I've asked how you understand it.

 

[Targaryen]

It doesn't, it's part of the story of the Fall. Are you eventually going to get somewhere?

 

[jgr]

It doesn't, it's part of the story of the Fall. Are you eventually going to get somewhere?

Yes, just one more question. Whose heel is "his" heel?

 

[Targaryen]

How bout you get to the actual point instead of games, like I asked you a few posts ago.

 

[jgr]

How bout you get to the actual point instead of games, like I asked you a few posts ago.

Would you agree that "his" is Christ's?

 

[Targaryen]

No, as it refers to humankind.

Why on earth did you come to this conclusion?

 

[jgr]

No, as it refers to humankind.

Why on earth did you come to this conclusion?

Why on earth do 100% of these Christian commentators come to this conclusion?

 

[Targaryen]

Why on earth do 100% of these Christian commentators come to this conclusion?

Exegesis of the text, read in fuller context then a lone phrase taken out of context from the rest of the story? You know, like your attempt?

Proper Biblical exegesis is applied in a critical examination of the text. Humankind is the target for the serpent to lash out at. As it does in nature, if you follow the allegory. It's the representation of evil.

It's certainly not prophetic on it's own. Even the Cambridge comments state as much:

This verse has been called the Protevangelium. There is no prediction of a personal victor, or even of an ultimate victory. Commentators used to see in the words, “thou shalt bruise his heel,” a prediction of the sufferings and crucifixion of our Lord, as “the seed” of the woman; and in the words, “it shall bruise thy head,” the victory of the Crucified and Risen Son of Man over the forces of sin and death. We are not justified in going to the full length of this interpretation.

 

[jgr]

Exegesis of the text, read in fuller context then a lone phrase taken out of context from the rest of the story? You know, like your attempt?

Proper Biblical exegesis is applied in a critical examination of the text. Humankind is the target for the serpent to lash out at. As it does in nature, if you follow the allegory. It's the representation of evil.

It's certainly not prophetic on it's own. Even the Cambridge comments state as much:

This verse has been called the Protevangelium. There is no prediction of a personal victor, or even of an ultimate victory. Commentators used to see in the words, “thou shalt bruise his heel,” a prediction of the sufferings and crucifixion of our Lord, as “the seed” of the woman; and in the words, “it shall bruise thy head,” the victory of the Crucified and Risen Son of Man over the forces of sin and death. We are not justified in going to the full length of this interpretation.

Cambridge does not attempt to identify who "his" refers to. So let me requalify my own question, "Why do the majority of commentators identify 'his' as referring to Christ?"

 

[Targaryen]

Perhaps it was older exegetical study on the text? Perhaps the authors of such commentaries were more into a full blown literalist viewpoint then is considered proper criticism back then? We don't really know.

 

[jgr]

Perhaps it was older exegetical study on the text? Perhaps the authors of such commentaries were more into a full blown literalist viewpoint then is considered proper criticism back then? We don't really know.

Couldn't be considered literalist; ascribing "his" to Christ is an obvious spiritualization of the text.

 

[Targaryen]

Perhaps, but these commentators were also taking a fuller view of the passage rather then on the passage itself, it could also be said. There are many ways to look at even biblical criticism as much as passages in Scripture itself. Again, what does this have to do with prophecy, as has been misused by a certain portion of Christians?

 

[BABerean2]

Perhaps rather then playing at some strange game, you can explain how this passage from Genesis is somehow prophecy. After all, YOU are the one claiming so, not me.

Why is the heel from Genesis chapter 3 important?
The answer was found in a stone box in Israel.
See the link below.

Heel bone of crucified man
In a stone box, the only trace of crucifixion

........................................................................................................................
The Seed Promise…

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.


Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.


2Sa 7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
2Sa 7:13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.


Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:


Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament (covenant), which is shed for many for the remission of sins.


Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.


Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.


Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.


.

 

[Targaryen]

I guess you were too busy trying to preach then to read the full responses to this?

 

[Ken Rank]

Secondly, why would you connect God's name with this fiction?

That's the weightier issue for me, Steve. As you know, "name" in Hebrew (shem) is dealing more with the name bearers character, reputation and authority rather than "what we call Him." And so to walk in His name is to walk in a manner consistent with His character and authority or that adds to His reputation. But here is the kicker for those who aren't familiar with this concept... to profane God's name is to act against His authority, stand in opposition to His character, or take from His reputation.

So, when we make claims that are not true, are not in Scripture, and have not been spoken by God... and yet we claim to belong to God... then when these things are revealed as fraud or do not come to pass... we profane God's name because His authority was not behind it and we took from His reputation because we misrepresented Him.

 

[JackRT]

Does this qualify?

Genesis 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.

I am no Hebrew linguist but I will attempt to answer this. The Garden of Eden was a place of total innocence where all the animals lived in peace according to the myth. This is important to keep in mind for a moment. In this verse God is cursing the serpent --- see vs14. God informs the serpent that there will be enmity (a feeling or condition of hostility; hatred; ill will; animosity; antagonism) between the serpent and Eve (Eve being the only woman alive at the time). For the first time the innocence of Eden is broken, not just between the serpent and Eve but also between the serpent's offspring and all of humanity subsequently. The myth thereby neatly explains the natural caution we all have concerning snakes.

The next phrase is much more difficult "it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel". We have to ask just who or what "it" is. Grammatically "it" has to be enmity --- an concept rather than a creature. Somehow this enmity will damage the serpent and somehow the serpent will retaliate and damage enmity's heel. It is a difficult and puzzling passage. I do not see how Christ could possibly come into this story unless Christ is the "enmity" which seems extremely strange and very problematic. I can only conclude this is not a prophesy in the usual sense but merely an attempt to explain why humanity has always had a loathing for snakes. The author is far from clear perhaps deliberately so because an element of puzzlement and disconnect is characteristic of mythologies in general.

 

[Petros2015]

Just FYI,

In the Vulgate which was the definitive translation for quite some time, St. Jerome translated Gen 3:15 as

15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

The hebrew is vague here as to the gender or the kind of crusher whether it is singular or like a group of descendants. The one RCC member I knew took this verse as a foreshadowing of Mary and not Christ (which made my head explode).

Did Mary Crush the Serpent’s Head? – Catholic Bible Student | Catholic Bible Student – A Blog About the Bible, Catholicism and the Habit of Study
http://catholicbiblestudent.com/2013/02/mary-crush-serpents-head.html
Vulgate - Wikipedia
For over a thousand years (c. AD 400–1530), the Vulgate was the definitive edition of the most influential text in Western European society. Indeed, for most Western Christians, it was the only version of the Bible ever encountered. The Vulgate's influence throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance into the Early Modern Period is even greater than that of the King James Version in English; for Christians during these times the phraseology and wording of the Vulgate permeated all areas of the culture.