Matthew 24:34

[HIM]

Pay real close attention to everything that's being asked in this chapter.

1st verse the disciples are talking about the temple.
Jesus tells them it will be destroyed.

Note verse 3; they are actually asking Jesus two to three different questions:
1. When will these things come to pass (meaning destruction of temple)?
2. AND when shall be the sign of your coming?
3. AND the end of the world?

Starting with verse 4; Jesus gives a sequence of answers that covers a lot of ground. (From the point they are in history to the end of time.)

Much of these conditions apply not only to the disciples personally, but also to believers from their time to Judgement Day. Although not every event Jesus describes here runs that whole gambit. Some are "beginning of the end"; some are "end of the end". Some of what had its initial fulfillment in the 1st century; certainly appears to have a parallel reemergence (but not the same event) at the end of time. (I.E. there is mass apostasy at the end and many "false christs and false prophets".)

Now verses 15 - 33:

Verse 15 speaks of "When you see the abomination that causes desolate standing in the holy place....." This verse does not mean that the "abomination that causes desolate" was to happen some point far off in the future. It was present; they just didn't "see" it.

Note this verse also says "Whosoever reads let him understand." That verse particularly is addressing people reading the New Testament after it has been written.

Now 2 Thessalonians 2:3 talks about "son of perdition being revealed".
John 17:12 names the "son of perdition" as being Judas.

Now just as Jews today are looking for a political messiah; did the leaders of the 1st century (or did Judas himself) think he was going to take Jesus's place and be the leader who would come to overthrow Rome? If you know much about the Talmud; Rabbinic Judaism still thinks their messiah will overthrow Christ. I don't know if the leaders or Judas at that time thought he was the messiah; but according to Thessalonians that appears to have been the case. He exalts himself over all that's called God. After all Judas is the human antecedent to the crucifixion. He was the "linch pin" in the leaders' plan.

Now these next segments are going to be long and involved hearkening back to passages in the book of Daniel. (Warning - yes I know - it's a lot of info

Atonement Time Table:

Daniel 9:27 says "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week and in the middle of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease…" Now a lot of Bible commentators ascribe this to a 7 year tribulation. Which is true that this passage ascribes to a tribulation; but that tribulation is (as stated here) "for one week".

BUT - when we start looking at the gospels, we see some interesting things:

1. We have Mary anointing Jesus's feet "6 days before the Passover". This occurred on the Friday (Thursday after sundown) prior to the sabbath that fell the day before the triumphant entry into Jerusalem. The seventh day would have been the day of the crucifixion.

Verse 24 of Daniel 9 says that "70 weeks are determined upon the people and upon the holy city…." Verse 27 states that this ends on "the consummation". The next time table we are given is "three score and two weeks" (62 weeks). Than another 8 weeks to the consummation. The "consummation" is Pentecost. 70 weeks before that is the death of John the Baptist. 62 weeks from the death of John the Baptist, going toward Pentecost is the Friday before the crucifixion.

This lands us right were we started - 6 days before the Passover with Mary and anointing Jesus's feet. Jesus states (of this event) that "she has reserved this against the day of my burial". This commences what is called in the Scripture "the great tribulation".

2. Three days later, oil was poured over Jesus's head. He states this is done for his burial. (His burial commenced that night.) 3 days and 3 nights later he's dead. This is the "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth". This event falls on the heels of the last day he spends in the temple teaching. That day, he spent explaining to the people the destruction of the Jewish religion and warned them of future events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem. By the time we get to 70 AD (destruction of the temple) and 93 AD (Herod Agrippa II dies); we have the end of the nation. Jesus also makes some references to judgement day at the end of time; but states at that time that he does not know when Judgement Day will happen.

3. Within the context of the discussion of the dismantling of the old testament system and the destruction of Jerusalem, Jesus talks about the tribulation. He says that it will be cut short, because if it is not cut short, no flesh would be saved.

So the tribulation commences with Mary anointing Jesus's feet and ends at the Passover. (It's cut short by a little less than a day.) So what happens at the end of the Passover? Jesus is confronted with the angel of death. Exodus says the angel of death will pass through the land at midnight.

Where is Jesus at midnight? He's in Gethsemane.

Now what is Gethsemane? A Gethsemane is a cave that houses an olive press. There were several Gethsemane(s) around the mount of olives because it was an olive grove and this is where they crushed the olives to make oil for the lamps in the temple. Contrary to popular belief "Gethsemane" was not a garden. Jesus was in a garden before he ends up in Gethsemane, but Gethsemane was not a garden. Now they went into this cave to escape the cold, because a lot of people stayed in these caves as lodging during the passover.

So, what happens while Jesus is in this Gethsemane? He's confronted with an angel. (Luke 22:43). Now the English says this angel "strengthens him" but the Greek actually says the angel "shows a display of strength (or force) before (against) him".

Next question: How is Jesus acting before he encounters this angel and how does he act after?

Jesus says "My soul is swallowed up in death…." and just prior to this he becomes "exceedingly sorrowful". This "sorrowfulness" is a process that's been happening for a couple of days now. It started Tuesday night after being "anointed for burial" and becomes progressively worse until the night of Passover.

So if the breath of life is what makes a person "a living soul"; all the angel of death has to do is remove the breath of life and the person dies. Now Jesus is confronted with the angel of death, but he doesn't physically die. Why is this? This is because of his Divine nature. Now if he didn't have a Divine nature, at this point he would have been physically dead; but since the Divine nature has yet to be severed from the human nature, he's still alive. For all intent and purpose though, his soul has been severed from his personhood; reserved in Sheol to await the death of his body. This is where he "preached to spirits in prison". (1 Pete 3:19) Also Acts 2:27 & 31 say "you have not left my soul in hell, nor will suffer your holy one (body) to see decay.

The next event to happen is the arrest, trial, beating, Peter's denial (3 AM), Pilate, Herod, Judas returns money to the temple is told "See too it yourself." Pilate, Barabbas, Pilate washes his hands before the public. Tells the public "See too it yourselves." The people say "Let his blood be on us and our children." (6 to 7 AM), condemnation, Judas goes and hangs himself, flogging, mocking, crucifixion (9 AM), sun darkened (noon), death, veil rent (3 PM), burial (before sundown), Saturday The Sabbath, resurrection (3 AM Sunday morning).

So from the point of the encounter with the angel of death, Jesus's soul is rent from his personhood. He goes through all the following events till just before his death pretty much emotionless.

The Crucifixion:

There are four things recorded that Jesus utters just before he dies, but of those 4 phrases the first one that is quasi comprehendible to anyone witnessing this is "Eli Eli lama sabach thani.". The priests think he's calling Elisha. The second phrase "I thirst." was probably only heard by the soldiers and is stated that he said this because he recognized "all had been accomplished". At that point he's given vinegar and hyssop; (which is a mild sedative); which he drinks. Prior to this he'd been given vinegar and sour wine, which he'd refused.

The next two phrases "Into your hands I commend my spirit" and "It is finished" are recorded for us as interpretations of what is intended, yet to the people witnessing this, it looks like delirious screaming. The Greek indicates that the noise Jesus makes sounds like the screeching of a crow. (He's breaking down cognitively at this point because his personhood is being destroyed.) Keep in mind that the sun is still darkened and has been darkened for about 3 hours.

Which phrase came first is unclear from the text, because the sequence is derived from combining the accounts in two different gospels. The "it is finished" is followed by "bowed the head"; which appears to be the last thing that happened.

The last thing recorded to occur just before death is "yielding up the ghost (or spirit)". The language here is interesting because the word "yielding" is most commonly translated as "betrayed" (turned over). The "spirit" that's being "betrayed" is defined as "his spirit". This is not a reference to the Holy Spirit because it would have been phrased differently if it was.

So this "spirit" appears to be the human component that "houses" conscious awareness of God and if "it is finished" was a reference to a spiritual awareness of being forsaken; it would make sense that "betray" (his) "spirit" would be the last conscious act Jesus would surrender to before the Divine nature is rent from the human body, thus causing his death. The veil in the temple was rent top to bottom simultaneously with Jesus dying; so thus I think is the symbolic indicator of his Divinity "torn" from his body.

Now returning for a minute to the phrase concerning the tribulation being shortened or no flesh would be saved. The tribulation ended with the encounter of the angel of death. That was the shortening there of.

Right after this angel departs, comes Judas and the posse to arrest Jesus. Peter pulls out his sword (this is actually the second time this happens) and whacks off the ear of the high priest's servant. The first time this happens (this was the first encounter in the winter garden) Jesus heals this servant. The second time this happens (in Gethsemane) he doesn't. Now is this the same servant who had his ear cut off twice? I don't know. If it is though, this would give some credence as to why Jesus didn't heal him again. The name of the servant given in John is Malchus. This is the Greek version of the Hebrew name Melek; which means "king".

After this, Jesus turns to Peter and says: "Do you think that I can not pray to my Father (right now) and he will send me more than 12 legions of angels? But how than should the Scripture be fulfilled? So this is how it must be." This clues us in on the fact that Jesus is aware that he doesn't have to do this. He could call it quits and go back to heaven and that would be the end of it; thus no flesh would be saved. This hearkens back to Jesus praying if this cup could pass from him; "Not my will but Yours be done".

Keep in mind that Jesus's soul has already been severed from his personhood and is in Hades. The fact that this happened is a mercy to the rest of us, because what Jesus is indicating here; is that if this hadn't happened, he would have quit because the process of being forsaken was more than his soul could deal with. Now at this point, it does not seem to me that Jesus is consciously aware of what his soul is "feeling"; although he is aware of what happened to it.

So in turn this could be why the English translators said this angel "strengthened" him; because in a round about way that's exactly what happened. He was strengthened through the death of his soul.

So what happened when Jesus died?

His soul was delivered from hell, joined his spirit (that he'd "betrayed") and in his human nature he stood before the Father as proof that he'd made it out of this ordeal without sinning. Revelation 5 - He's the lamb slain who appears in heaven to open the seals.

Jeremiah 30 talks about the "time of Jacob's trouble". This is also equated to in eschatological speak as "the tribulation". What is important to note about what Jeremiah says concerning Jacob's trouble is that "Jacob" is delivered from them on account of his own obedience.

Matthew 24:29-31 talks about what happens "immediately after the tribulation". Sun darkened, moon does not give light - this happened from noon to 3 PM on the day of the crucifixion. The stars fall from heaven and the powers of heaven are shaken. This is probably a reference to not just the severance of the two natures; but in that process Jesus the man is forsaken by the rest of the Godhead; and because of what he/He was created as, this is why the powers of heaven are shaken.

The next verse: "They shall see the sign of the son of man in heaven…" This is something that entities in heaven are looking down upon. Thus probably why the sun was darkened and the moon did not give its light. The creatures on earth can not see into heaven, but the entities in heaven can see what's going on down on earth; and what they are looking at is the crucifixion. They are watching Jesus die is what's going on.

How do we know this is what it means by "sign of the son of man in heaven"? Jesus makes a reference speaking to the Pharisees about "A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sigh, but the only sign given it will be the sign of the prophet Jonah; whereas Jonah was in the wale's belly 3 days and 3 nights, so shall the son of man be in the heart of the earth." Now we know when this happened. The 3 days and 3 nights started sundown Tuesday and ended when Jesus died Friday afternoon. So the only public display that occurred to this "wicked and adulterous generation" was the crucifixion.

The next part of this verse: "..then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn and they shall see the son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." This verse is not talking about the return of Christ to earth; it's talking about the ascension into heaven upon his death. The tribes of the earth that mourn are all the unregenerate souls who are in Sheol and see this happen. Once Jesus leaves Sheol all the redeemed on the old testament side of the cross go with him. They got their 'ticket to ride' - there they go! Revelation picks this up as: "a multitude that no man could number who came out of great tribulation." This is the "first resurrection over which the second death has no power". This first resurrection also includes those who come after, who live and die in the interim between Pentecost and judgement day.

Interestingly to note too is that these are "of every kindred, tribe, tongue and nation". They aren't just Israelites from the old testament side of the cross. These are people from around the globe; which explaining how people can be redeemed based on the testimony of creation alone, without ever having heard Scripture, is the subject of a whole other Bible study.

So that's what all that means and it's all taking place from the perspective of what is witnessed in the spiritual realm in both directions; earthly souls looking up and heaven looking down.

And here we finally get to Matthew 24:34. All these things have come to pass in the generation of the disciples.

Now look at Matthew 24:35:
"Heaven and earth will pass away..... But of that hour (heaven and earth will pass away) no one knows...." Or at least at the point Jesus said that he didn't know when Judgement Day would be.

I think at the point Jesus rose from the dead though; he did know when Judgement Day would be. He eludes to this in the book of Acts just before the ascension. He tells the disciples that it's not for them to know times and seasons the Father put in His own authority. Note though that Jesus DOES NOT say that he doesn't know the day or hour of his return at that point.

Keep in mind that the "no man knows the day or hour.... " statement comes before the crucifixion. Which I think the revelation of when the day and hour would be came with the unsealing of the scroll.

Now will there come a day when what is in the scroll is "unsealed" to believers on earth; (in the form of "knowledge will increase" via being able to put together all the pieces of what's written in Scripture)?

That I don't know the answer to. But there seems to be some indications in the New Testament that the believers just before Judgement Day comes; will know that they are most likely the generation that sees the return of Christ.

Did you do this study my friend?
If so Thanks for the time you put into it. No offense but I did not read it all and most won’t because of its length. But I do know without reading it a lot of it is true because you brought out the fact that Jesus was asked three questions in verse 3. Most miss that important detail

 

[HIM]

I hope you don't mind but I have a question -2nd Thessalonians 2:3 _ you state the son of perdition as being Judas and I know that most churches teach that the son of perdition is Judas. My question is why then in 4:4 does it begins to describe the son of perdition and his actions as someone other than Judas, none of what is written fits Judas _ more like the devil or the Antichrist ..... "who opposeth and exalted himself above all that is called God, or that is worship; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."
And going on further through to verse 12, gives some more descriptions, refers to him as the wicked one, coming after the workings of Satan, and all the powers, signs and lying wonders, deception. And the subject is still the same as it was in verse 3 concerning the son perdition being revealed. That's my understanding of it.

Hi Sheila! Also in verse 2 it says the day of Christ is at hand and then in verse three it it says that that day will not come until the son of perdition is revealed. Couple that with verse 4 and one can see that it is a very apparent wicked person who puts himself at God’s level and is probably the head of a Christian church. But due to the fact that the road to salvation is narrow and there are few on it most professing Christians don’t recognize him for what he is.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Did you do this study my friend?

Yes, although not all at once. I've been slowly working though various passages that catch my eye off and on for 30 or so years. I like to study because I like to find stuff. And actually a lot of stuff I find "on accident"; (when that wasn't exactly what I was looking for).

If so Thanks for the time you put into it. No offense but I did not read it all and most won’t because of its length.

Yeah, I know a lot of people don't want to "read long stuff"; (but they'll read all the Harry Potter books, or Lord of the Rings, or whatever). LOL One of my favorite citizen journalists said this concerning what he discovered about a lot of his colleagues in the research field.

"The pandemic burned away all the moral cowards and intellectual frauds! Covid killed a lot of my heroes; just none of them died from the disease."

Chris Martinson - Peak Prosperity

It's rather uncanny, but I think that principle applies across a lot of fields.

Other thing I noticed though, is if you catch someone's attention with something they will tend to read all of it. They may come back to it a couple of times; but they will read it. I post a lot of Bible study stuff on Fan Fiction too. And because the subjects are a little "outside the box"; people tend to read it.

Also in verse 2 it says the day of Christ is at hand and then in verse three it it says that that day will not come until the son of perdition is revealed.

This subject has been pretty extensively covered in this thread too. Scripture tells us Judas was the "son of perdition" And all the language in 2 Thessolonians that talks about "the son of perdition" is not actually in the future tense; although the "lawless" is in the future tense. King James translates it "man of lawlessness" although man isn't actually in the Greek. A more accurate translation would be "the lawlessness" that "manifests lying signs and wonders. (And low and behold; what do we see all around us?)

I did a little exposition in anther response about Satan and Adam compared to Judas and Jesus. If there was any human being in history that Satan deemed pivotal to kill; it was Jesus Christ. And he did that through Judas. He was like the "mafia / hitman / pimp". There's a passage (think it's Ezekiel?) that actually talks about Jesus being "trafficked". Thus 30 pieces of silver = the price of a dead slave!

Lot of interesting pieces to dig up!

 

[HIM]

Yes, although not all at once. I've been slowly working though various passages that catch my eye off and on for 30 or so years. I like to study because I like to find stuff. And actually a lot of stuff I find "on accident"; (when that wasn't exactly what I was looking for).

I can relate.

Yeah, I know a lot of people don't want to "read long stuff"; (but they'll read all the Harry Potter books, or Lord of the Rings, or whatever). LOL

I am not so quick to put people in a box. Personally I don’t bother reading some of the lengthier post, because very often it is just fluff or filled with a bunch of subjectivity. None of which do I wish to spend time on.

This subject has been pretty extensively covered in this thread too. Scripture tells us Judas was the "son of perdition"

That verse actually reads “I was keeping them in thy Name, whom thou has given me I guarded and not one of them lost except the son, THE lost.
I find it interesting that grammatically Jesus still refers to Judas as a son even though there was no hope for him. That is love. Reminds of the prodigal son.

And what was said of John 17:13 also applies to 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Except in this instance it is referring to the antichrist and the body of believers who are attached to that entity.

And all the language in 2 Thessolonians that talks about "the son of perdition" is not actually in the future tense; although the "lawless" is in the future tense. King James translates it "man of lawlessness" although man isn't actually in the Greek

The grammar is in the aorist which has no respect to past, present or future though it is commonly translated past. In this case we see that the Spirit reveals in verse 7 that the mystery of iniquity doth already work. And that when this man of sin or lawlessness is revealed is taken out of the way. (Judas had already be taken out of the way)Then shall the wicked be revealed whom the Lord shall consume with the brightness of His coming. These text take us back to chapter one where this context is established.
Here are the verses.

2 Thessalonians 1:6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
2 Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
2 Thessalonians 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
2 Thessalonians 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
2 Thessalonians 1:10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.



And Yes man is.
In the Alexandrian text it says, “man of the lawlessness”. And in the Byzantine it reads,” man of the sin”.

Okay?

Take care

 

[Sheila Davis]

Doesn't matter what my opinion, your opinion or your uncle's opinion is! What does Scripture say. Do you see anywhere in the Bible where it talks about more than one Adam and Eve created? (Romans 5:12)
Besides the fact that even secular science traces the entire human race back to two individuals
And who's the Redeemer for those who are not the seed of Adam?

1)Secular science from my studies trace the human race back to *one* humanoid so far.
How Did Humans Evolve?
2)Nowhere in my statement did I say God created more than Adam and Eve.
3)Nowhere in my statement did I give you my uncle's view - I said quite a few years later I received my answer.
4) I have wrote to you I have my beliefs you have yours I'm not saying your right and I'm wrong or I'm right and you're wrong - never said my opinion matters or yours.
5 )I haven't given you my views on Cain or his immediate sister, you are assuming what I believe and assuming wrong.

 

[The Righterzpen]

I am not so quick to put people in a box. Personally I don’t bother reading some of the lengthier post, because very often it is just fluff or filled with a bunch of subjectivity. None of which do I wish to spend time on.

That's a good point. I do notice that too; although I tend to scan things looking for something I'm not familiar with. Sometimes "unusual things found" are valid, and it does take patients to sift through where someone is actually sharing something legit, as opposed to having made it up; or are just regurgitating information that's already known to be not well researched.

That verse actually reads “I was keeping them in thy Name, whom thou has given me I guarded and not one of them lost except the son, THE lost.
I find it interesting that grammatically Jesus still refers to Judas as a son even though there was no hope for him. That is love. Reminds of the prodigal son.

And what was said of John 17:13 also applies to 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Except in this instance it is referring to the antichrist and the body of believers who are attached to that entity.

I checked this in the Greek. "son of perdition" is exactly the same phrase used in both passages. It's not "son of perdition" in Thessalonians and "son of loss" in John. It is verbatim the same Greek phrase.

Although you are correct that "perdition" comes from a Greek root that is assumed to be from the Greek word used for "loss", ("perish", "destroy"). Although "perdition" (Strong's# 684) is not translated any place as "loss" per se; but it is translated "destroyed", "damnable", "perish" etc.

There is an interesting phrase in Revelation 11:18 that talks about Judgement Day being when God will "corrupt" / "destroy" those who "corrupted" / "destroyed" the earth. It's not the same Greek word though, nor does this "destroy" come from the derivative of "perdition" that means "loss". They will be "cast out" to be left to "corruption" as they had done to the earth.

That phrase struck me because at no point in history has man actually taken the blueprint that makes life (DNA) to "corrupt" it and make it do things it was never designed to do. Not only has gain of function research released this myriad of prion(ized) proteins on humanity (via actual Covid infection, or result of the jabbies); they impact any mammal or other creature who has "close enough design". And now we have this altered bird flu pandemic too; killing the birds. (Part of why they are predicting a famine; because this is now in the domestic chicken / turkey / duck population.) This N1N5 (or what ever its designation is) is very hard to infect humans because the interior temperature of the lungs of birds is a lot higher than humans. It just can't replicate very well in animals other than birds.

And if that's not "corrupting the earth" in a literal material way; I don't what else would be? It's akin to Judas being the "lynch pin" in the plot to kill the 2nd Person of the Trinity. He was one "man faced" entity in a whole line of entities driven by Satan's anger because his "time is short". Just like this pandemic; Fauci had a whole line of "useful idiots" who availed themselves to this destructive endeavor. Very real world "biological manifestation" of the destruction evil causes. Thus I believe as the fallout of what unleashing this "research" does to this planet; is another manifestation of the reality that we are close to the end.

(And does this mean the Lake of Fire will be "further plagued" with some future type (incurable) multiplication of "Covid variants"?) I know on the surface the question just sounds silly; but.. think about it a minute.

As per the acknowledgement of Judas being "a son"; note the sequence of the passage in John. Jesus is not saying that Judas was a "child of God" because there are also those who "are of your father the devil". (There are "children of God" in this world; but also "children of god" (The "god of this world" / the "prince of the power of the air".) Yes Judas was a man created by God; created in God's image (thus the vehicle on how he is accountable for his sin) but he is not a "child of God". Those who are the "siblings of Christ" ("children of God") are those who obey the Father. Jesus makes that distinction pretty clear in passages like Matthew 12:50 and Mark 3:35

The grammar is in the aorist which has no respect to past, present or future though it is commonly translated past. In this case we see that the Spirit reveals in verse 7 that the mystery of iniquity doth already work. And that when this man of sin or lawlessness is revealed is taken out of the way. (Judas had already be taken out of the way)Then shall the wicked be revealed whom the Lord shall consume with the brightness of His coming. These text take us back to chapter one where this context is established.
Here are the verses.

The passage I was referring to (the only verses in this sequence that are actually "future tense") Is 2 Thessalonians 2:8. "Man of sin"; yes "man" is in the text; but "man" is not in 2:8 where Paul is talking about "the lawless". King James translates 2:8 "the Wicked"; but "man" is not in the text in that verse. Nor is it in the following verse (2:9) "Even him who's coming is after the working of Satan...." "Even him" is not in the text. The "entity" that is described in the future tense in this sequence is not a singular person.

And Yes man is.
In the Alexandrian text it says, “man of the lawlessness”. And in the Byzantine it reads,” man of the sin”.

Okay?

Two different verses. Note the sequence you quoted in 1 Thessalonians. It's "them" (plural). It's not a singular entity. There is not "one man of sin" yet to come.

The (singular) "man of sin" / "son of perdition" was already revealed (which was Judas) And the text in John actually says "that Scripture might be fulfilled". And this is why the discussion of "man of sin" / "son of perdition" in 2 Thessalonians is not future tense; although the manifestation of "the wicked" (or "the lawlessness") is.

Just like the question the disciples asked Jesus in Matthew 24. Pay REAL CLOSE attention to the details.

 

[The Righterzpen]

5 )I haven't given you my views on Cain or his immediate sister, you are assuming what I believe and assuming wrong.

OK, I will ask you directly than: Do you believe Cain married some.... female entity that was not a descendent of Adam?

And if that's what you believe; how does that jive with "And God made everything after its own kind"?

1)Secular science from my studies trace the human race back to *one* humanoid so far.
How Did Humans Evolve?

And how do you get "evolution" (survival of the fittest) in a world where there was no death until Adam sinned?

 

[Sheila Davis]

OK, I will ask you directly than: Do you believe Cain married some.... female entity that was not a descendent of Adam?

And if that's what you believe; how does that jive with "And God made everything after its own kind"?


You actually said some female entity that was not a descendant of Adam, still indicating your assumptions....... WOW

I used the words IMMEDIATE SISTER TWICE!

I mentioned that I wasn't trying to start a discussion about this - yet you are - I knew you would.

When I say this _ which may be rather lengthy and I dislike writing long replies - I'm not going to continue to go back and forth. I will state what I believe and give reference from others also using scriptures.
___Before Adam ate the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge - there was no sin in the world. Adam had complete access to the fruit of the Tree of Life. The fruit and leaves of the Tree of Life is for healing.

What does Revelation 22:2 mean? | BibleRef.com

Revelation 22:2 - Meaning and Commentary on Bible Verse

The fruit of of the Tree of Life gave Adam and his offspring immortality even that they had mortal bodies. That is why God put them out of the garden _ God said in Genesis 3:22 lest they eat of Tree of Life and live forever.

Did Adam and Eve Die When They Ate the Forbidden Fruit?

Immortality and the Tree of Life

Adam's sin brought death into the world .... Literal death

Romans 5:12-21 KJ - - Bible Gateway

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 15:20-23 - King James Version

As long as Adam, Eve and their offspring had access to the Tree of Life there was no death. Adam lived many years before he sinned. God did not give a timeline between Adam's creation and when he ate from the Tree of Knowledge but just going by the scriptures given, the fruit from the Tree of Life gave all instant healing, and a form of immortality. 50 thousand, 70 thousand, 100 thousand, years or more of life. Adam's offspring migrated, his immediate offspring married each other and there was no sin then, and any inbreeding and any damage or health issues was eradicated by the fruit of the Tree of Life. Adams offspring sired offspring and it continued until the fall of Adam. That's why I use the word "immediate sister." Many, many, many, years had passed between Adam's offspring before his sin and offspring after his fall. So who Cain married was not his "immediate sister" and one can say not his sister at all - after Adam ate from the Tree of Knowledge, everything changed. As I said scripture does not give an account for any children born before Adam sinned other than God telling the first two male and female to be fruitful and multiply and "replenish" the Earth. Only the first two chapters of Genesis deal with before the fall of Adam the rest of the Bible is the aftermath of the Fall of the first man. Which is why preachers have taught for centuries the Earth is 6,000 years old and Adam sinned right after he was created.
Losing access to the Tree of Life, God himself said it, quite a few years later it was written down in the Laws "do not marry your mother, father, your sister, your brother, your aunt, your uncle, etc.

15 Important Bible Verses About Incest

Scripture says God is the same he never changes _ so if it was wrong when he gave the Laws it would have been wrong with Cain.
I've heard Minister's teach for decades what scriptures I have given mean and I disagree for the most part.




And how do you get "evolution" (survival of the fittest) in a world where there was no death until Adam sinned?

I have no idea where you coming from with this question?
Have you read any of my other comments on other threads concerning death and Adam? Or are you testing me?
Evolution had nothing to do with Adam or Eve or their descendants. Scripture clearly states God formed man himself from the dust of the earth, breathed himself the breath of Life into Adam and placed him in the garden. Not one of his other creations on Earth did he breath into himself or form himself other than man. Now the beasts of the field, the creeping things, the fowl of the air, living life in the waters - God called the Earth to bring those life-forms forth _ that could be a form of evolution.

 

[The Righterzpen]

I have no idea where you coming from with this question?

You stated that Cain did not marry one of his sisters.

If Adam and Eve were the only humans on earth and Cain did not marry a descendent of them; than what did he marry?

Darwinian evolution is a lie. There is no "transitional life form" between man and monkey and seeing how we can't cross humans and monkeys because God made everything "after it's own kind", than the only plausible explanation is that Cain married another human being, because after all, he did have descendants.

Have you read any of my other comments on other threads concerning death and Adam?

No I have not read any of your other comments on other threads concerning the death of Adam.

Or are you testing me?

The Scripture is the measure by where your beliefs are tested. And no, I have not written any Scripture, so it's not me who's "testing" you.

There's no evidence in the Scripture that God made any other humans other than Adam and Eve; nor is there any evidence from Scripture that God made any sub-human type species whereof Cain could have attained an "other than human" wife.

So thus the answer to the question would have been; that Cain's wife was one of Adam and Eve's other children. For the entire human race came from Adam and Eve.

Biologically, modern science has been able to trace that. Scientists found the first link through mitochondrial DNA decades ago. I knew of "Ancestral Eve" back in high school and I'm 50 years old. All humanity can be traced back to one female because we only inherit our mitochondrial DNA from our mothers.

If you know anything about reproductive biology; the only thing sperm contribute is DNA. All cell organelles that eventually develop into organisms come from the egg, because eggs are complete single cells; sperm are not. (Thus the basic biological definition of "female".) Sperm only have two mitochondria that make the flagellum (tail) move. The flagellum is made out of protein. The DNA in sperm is housed by a protein shell. On the outside of the front end of that shell are enzymes that give the sperm the ability to fertilize an egg. Sperm aren't particularly complicated. All the cell organelles inside all of your cells came from your mother because only eggs are complete cells.

Human origins in a southern African palaeo-wetland and first migrations | Nature

Well, the "ancestral Adam" link was finally found probably about two decade ago now. All human males came from the same father. Scientists figured that could likely be traced through the Y chromosome and I think it was the human genome project that finally found that link.

At this point too, I believe they found the X link in "ancestral Adam" to the rest of humanity too. All life forms have a "female chromosome" but that "female chromosome" is not always labeled as "X". In reproductively viable female mammals there are two like chromosomes (XX). In most other species females are also "like chromosomes". But in birds the males are "like chromosomes" and the females are "un-like chromosomes" ZW (unlike chromosomes) are female birds and ZZ (like chromosomes) are male birds. In mammals XY is male. XX is female. The ZZ / ZW (as opposed to XX / XY) classification is also used in some insects and reptiles. Yet other insect species use the XX / XY classification system.

So yes, everyone who's genetically classified as human (which at this point also includes "Neanderthals") as we all have "Neanderthal DNA"; came from 1 male and 1 female. Although geneticists may classify "Neanderthal" as an "early human" genotype; Scripturally they would simply be descendants of Adam, who have a genetic defect. This makes sense as much of what's deemed as "Neanderthal DNA" in the modern human genome, is believed to be responsible for certain genetically based diseases.

There are some obvious skeletal differences between humans and apes / monkeys; which is still consistent in what paleontologists would classify as "large bipedal apes". Both evolutionists as well as creationists agree that bipedalism does not necessarily mean hominoid ancestry, as even modern tree dwelling apes / monkeys have hip and leg anatomy that's characteristic of bipedal ability when bipedal stance suits the needs of the creature even if they don't consistently walk in a bipedal position. Tree dwellers in particular have the anatomical "ability" to stand "naturally" on two feet. This is true despite their arm / elbow anatomy is clearly monkey / ape in structure. It's the same anatomical principle as to why humans don't generally travel through forested environments by swinging from their arms. Although obviously humans can climb trees and can swing from their arms.

God called the Earth to bring those life-forms forth _ that could be a form of evolution.

Your problem here is that evolutionary theory requires death; which according to Scripture din't exist until Adam and Eve transgressed. Which the transgression fell between the point they'd been created; yet before any children were conceived.

 

[Sheila Davis]

You stated that Cain did not marry one of his sisters.

If Adam and Eve were the only humans on earth and Cain did not marry a descendent of them; than what did he marry?

Darwinian evolution is a lie. There is no "transitional life form" between man and monkey and seeing how we can't cross humans and monkeys because God made everything "after it's own kind", than the only plausible explanation is that Cain married another human being, because after all, he did have descendants.



No I have not read any of your other comments on other threads concerning the death of Adam.



The Scripture is the measure by where your beliefs are tested. And no, I have not written any Scripture, so it's not me who's "testing" you.

There's no evidence in the Scripture that God made any other humans other than Adam and Eve; nor is there any evidence from Scripture that God made any sub-human type species whereof Cain could have attained an "other than human" wife.

So thus the answer to the question would have been; that Cain's wife was one of Adam and Eve's other children. For the entire human race came from Adam and Eve.

Biologically, modern science has been able to trace that. Scientists found the first link through mitochondrial DNA decades ago. I knew of "Ancestral Eve" back in high school and I'm 50 years old. All humanity can be traced back to one female because we only inherit our mitochondrial DNA from our mothers.

If you know anything about reproductive biology; the only thing sperm contribute is DNA. All cell organelles that eventually develop into organisms come from the egg, because eggs are complete single cells; sperm are not. (Thus the basic biological definition of "female".) Sperm only have two mitochondria that make the flagellum (tail) move. The flagellum is made out of protein. The DNA in sperm is housed by a protein shell. On the outside of the front end of that shell are enzymes that give the sperm the ability to fertilize an egg. Sperm aren't particularly complicated. All the cell organelles inside all of your cells came from your mother because only eggs are complete cells.

Human origins in a southern African palaeo-wetland and first migrations | Nature

Well, the "ancestral Adam" link was finally found probably about two decade ago now. All human males came from the same father. Scientists figured that could likely be traced through the Y chromosome and I think it was the human genome project that finally found that link.

At this point too, I believe they found the X link in "ancestral Adam" to the rest of humanity too. All life forms have a "female chromosome" but that "female chromosome" is not always labeled as "X". In reproductively viable female mammals there are two like chromosomes (XX). In most other species females are also "like chromosomes". But in birds the males are "like chromosomes" and the females are "un-like chromosomes" ZW (unlike chromosomes) are female birds and ZZ (like chromosomes) are male birds. In mammals XY is male. XX is female. The ZZ / ZW (as opposed to XX / XY) classification is also used in some insects and reptiles. Yet other insect species use the XX / XY classification system.

So yes, everyone who's genetically classified as human (which at this point also includes "Neanderthals") as we all have "Neanderthal DNA"; came from 1 male and 1 female. Although geneticists may classify "Neanderthal" as an "early human" genotype; Scripturally they would simply be descendants of Adam, who have a genetic defect. This makes sense as much of what's deemed as "Neanderthal DNA" in the modern human genome, is believed to be responsible for certain genetically based diseases.

There are some obvious skeletal differences between humans and apes / monkeys; which is still consistent in what paleontologists would classify as "large bipedal apes". Both evolutionists as well as creationists agree that bipedalism does not necessarily mean hominoid ancestry, as even modern tree dwelling apes / monkeys have hip and leg anatomy that's characteristic of bipedal ability when bipedal stance suits the needs of the creature even if they don't consistently walk in a bipedal position. Tree dwellers in particular have the anatomical "ability" to stand "naturally" on two feet. This is true despite their arm / elbow anatomy is clearly monkey / ape in structure. It's the same anatomical principle as to why humans don't generally travel through forested environments by swinging from their arms. Although obviously humans can climb trees and can swing from their arms.



Your problem here is that evolutionary theory requires death; which according to Scripture din't exist until Adam and Eve transgressed. Which the transgression fell between the point they'd been created; yet before any children were conceived.

Apparently you didn't read anything I said -and I don't have a problem - you do - going on and on and on and not even relating to what I wrote - you pick out certain words and turn them around to suit you and write a bunch of words that has nothing to do with my statement. I already studied the scientific theory of evolution and including the Big Bang singularity and then tell me I have a problem with nothing you wrote is related to anything I said. I'm not reading anything else from you - you are uniquely off base.
To anyone else that may read this thread am I wrong or is this person actually misinterpreting my words whether deliberately or not?

 

[The Righterzpen]

To anyone else that may read this thread am I wrong or is this person actually misinterpreting my words whether deliberately or not?

Yes, if anyone else would like to "chime in" on the subject of whether or not I've accurately pegged the issues; that might be enlightening to read.

(Although several already have left comments about Judas being the son of perdition.)