Serpent Seed

[Notedstrangeperson]

Ah well, again we have this blatant racism in the Creationist sub-forum yet six pages in and no creationist is willing to confront it. As long as you're not an evolutionist anything goes it seems

In their defend last time a similar thread was made Mark Kennedy stepped in and argued against it.

 

[granpa]

The most difficult thing about childbirth is fitting the human brain through the birth canal.
it can even be life threatening.

now the serpent was wiser than any beast of the field

God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

the serpent said to the woman “You will not certainly die,”

To the woman God said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children.

But this is just one way of looking at it. You shouldnt leap to any conclusions.

 

[Research3]

So all 'Adamites' are caucasians but not all caucasians are Adamites.

Just how all Yorkshiremen are English, but not all English are Yorkshiremen. It's not complicated. In fact Two House Theology is a major basis of the Bible - the Jews are Israelites, but not all Israelites are Jews. Judah was only one tribe of Jacob (Israel). Throughout the entire Bible, the Jews and Israelites compromise two distinct seperate houses. Once you get your head around Two House Theology, you will see the evidence that the British (Anglo-Saxon-Celtic kindred) peoples are Israelites.

Just a thought - does this mean as well as creating all the races seperately, God also created groups of 'chosen' (Adamic) and 'unchosen' (non-Adamic) caucasians?

The non-Adamic inhabitants of Europe no longer exist, they were merely mesolithic hunter-gatherers who earlier populated Europe after the Ice-Age. They later became absorbed by the descendants of Noah who colonised parts of Europe after the flood (who were of the same race). Read the Table of Nations in Genesis - all of this is outlined. The 'Adamites' are solely the descendants of the first patriarchal dynasty listed in Genesis. Obviously not everyone was apart of that dynasty.

My 'bizarre reason' for thinking that the ancient Britons were much older than you say is fossil and historical evidence, mostly from the Romans.

The first Roman or Greek accounts of the British are from the first few centuries BC. The Romans did not live in the Mesolithic.

Papias also gave you a link showing the Picts are descended from an earlier tribe known as the Caledonians.

- The article says no such thing.
- I wrote most the article (my contributions on wikipedia cover virtually every page regarding ancient tribes).

Kind of stupid someone links to an article i mostly wrote and claims it says something it doesn't.

The original inhabitants were not wiped out as you suggest, because these Britons are the original inhabitants. And the Roman invaders who apparently brought their 'Adamic' genes were not from Mesopotamia either, they were from Italy.

All false. The ethnic-British descend from the Picts, Scots, Anglo-Saxons etc. These were not the Mesolithic inhabitants. The original Mesolithic populations were simply absorbed. This is basic history.

Using the Bible to support polytheism. The concept of irony is completely and utterly lost on you. The writers of the Bible knew there were other gods - false, nonexistant gods.

Monolatrism is not polytheism. Look it up, secondly scholarsknow that the Israelites were monolatrists.

And what makes us think that the God of the Bible is not?

Is not what? I believe God walked as a literal man on Earth. If you read Genesis it states God was ''walking'' in the Garden of Eden.

All Gods are deified people who once lived. This has been a major scholary position on myth since the 17th century.

Again I'm surprised you didn't pick up on my note on the 'Cheddar Man'. Analysis of his blood showed be belonged to haplogroup U (specifically haplogroup U5 which is mostly found in Europeans), which has been traced back to the Middle East. Didn't it occur to you to use this as evidence that ancient Britons could have come from Mesopotamia?

Which proves that Caucasians originated in the middle-east, which i already know. Charleton Coon placed their origin around Afghanistan. The Adamites of the Bible were just small population in Mesopotamia of this race - who for thousands of years have migrated. We find ourselves even in the Tarim Basin, China. Look up the Tocharian mummies.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

So all 'Adamites' are caucasians but not all caucasians are Adamites.

Just how all Yorkshiremen are English, but not all English are Yorkshiremen. It's not complicated.

I said it earlier and I'll say it again: your arguments allow racism against your own race. Classy.

The non-Adamic inhabitants of Europe no longer exist, they were merely mesolithic hunter-gatherers who earlier populated Europe after the Ice-Age. They later became absorbed by the descendants of Noah who colonised parts of Europe after the flood (who were of the same race).
...
The ethnic-British descend from the Picts, Scots, Anglo-Saxons etc. These were not the Mesolithic inhabitants. The original Mesolithic populations were simply absorbed. This is basic history.

Wait, haven't you mentioned that the Bible forbid marrying outside your race / tribe? How could they have been 'absorbed'?

The Romans did not live in the Mesolithic.

Hence the fossil evidence.

All Gods are deified people who once lived. This has been a major scholary position on myth since the 17th century.

So the God of the Bible was an actual, mortal human being?
I find your understanding of theology very confusing. First you say there are many gods, now you're saying these gods were just moral humans. In a blink you've changed from polytheist to atheist.

I'd say you're a very persistant troll but none of them go through that much effort, they'd just be trolling themselves.

Monolatrism is not polytheism.

Yes it is. The belief is polytheism (believing in the existance of more than one god), the practice is monolatrism (chosing to follow one god over another). The quotes I provided state that the Bible says there is only one God and there always has been. The other gods did not exist.

 

[granpa]

it also says that we all become sons of God

Divinization (Christian) - Religion-wiki

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

[Breaking up long post]

Which proves that Caucasians originated in the middle-east, which i already know.

Just to clarify, are you saying you believe Caucasians are descended from people in the Middle East based on the DNA evidence?

---------------

- The article [on Caledonians] says no such thing.
- I wrote most the article (my contributions on wikipedia cover virtually every page regarding ancient tribes).

Kind of stupid someone links to an article i mostly wrote and claims it says something it doesn't.

At the bottom under "See Also" is says the Picts were their most likely descendandts.

Your username wouldn't be "Anglopyramidologist" would it? I recall that username here on CF. Users such as yourself are the reason I personally regard Wikipedia as reliable as graffiti on the wall of a public toilet.

You also didn't reply to this post:

The Adamite occupation of Britain only began with the Trojans (c. 1100 BC) or if earlier legends can be trusted, the Samotheans around 2000 BC.

Type this on google: List of legendary kings of Britain

I wrote most of this article, refer to the dates. Also see my article on Tea Tephi at the bottom and Iolo Morganwg's Welsh Kings + Scota.

Using yourself as a source?

Your arguments come from articles ... you wrote? You claim something is true, link to the source, and then write / edit the source itself. All this time I thought you were merely picking the evidence you personally disagreed with, now it seems you're just making it up.

{Anglopyramidologist's user contributions}

-White Amazonian Indians
-White Aeothiopians
-Pyramidology
​

The Amazon, Ethiopia, Egypt, and of course the Middle East ... Gee, white people are all over the place. Except Britain, ironically.

And it further confirms my idea that you think about nothing else aside from race. This isn't a hobby, it's an obsession. Do you have any other interests, any at all? Trains maybe?

 

[granpa]

you keep accusing him of racism yet he hasnt said anything racist in this thread.

It seems to me that you are just trying to pick a fight.
If he is wrong then point out the errors.

even if he is racist you shouldnt sink to the level of just slinging mud.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

you keep accusing him of racism yet he hasnt said anything racist in this thread.

Claiming non-white people cannot be Christians doesn't strike you as racist?

If he is wrong then point out the errors.

Done.

 

[granpa]

where did he say that?

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

- Here he says only white people are 'Adamites', people descended from Adam (which you disagreed with).​

- Here he writes:
"Adam was Mesopotamian (Sumerian), therefore Caucasoid".​

- Here he writes:
"Genesis is clear Adam was Caucasian through etymology ... The Bible only concerns the history and future of this one race."​

- On a different thread (under an old username) he wrote:
"Find me where the scripture says eskimos, australian aborignes, sub-saharan africans, japanese, easter islanders etc all descended from Adam..."​

-On different thread he wrote:
"The Bible was written for the Adamic race only, therefore non-Adamic peoples are not included.
Once again, i ask - if you disagree and like mainstream Christians believe Christianity is a universal religion, show me the eskimos, easter islanders, sub-saharan africans, polynesians, australian aborigines etc in scripture.
Remember you appear to be defending monogenism and universalism here, so if that is the case show me in scripture where all the above races are mentioned. If Christianity is a 'universal' religion, for everyone, show me where all these races are mentioned in scripture."​

- [EDIT] He explicitly claims here (on another different thread) that non-white people cannot be Christians:
"Paul then spread Christianity to several non-Israelite nations, however these nations were still Adamic. Do you really think Paul traveled to India, China, Australia or North America? Those populations living there were never meant to be Christians."

But you don't need to take my word for it, ask him.​

 

[granpa]

sounds like he is accusing christianity of being racist.

one can be a theist and not be a christian you know.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

sounds like he is accusing christianity of being racist.

one can be a theist and not be a christian you know.

I doubt that, considering he identifies himself as a Christian / Christian seeker, he does not condemn this form of racism (or even considers it racist at all) and whenever someone disagrees with him he argues in favour for an 'ethocentric' view of Christianity.

 

[Research3]

I said it earlier and I'll say it again: your arguments allow racism against your own race. Classy.

Once again you have no idea what you are typing.

Wait, haven't you mentioned that the Bible forbid marrying outside your race / tribe? How could they have been 'absorbed'?

Because as i noted they were the same race. Last i knew on genetics, Oxford scholars were saying the Mesolithic inhabitants of Britain were Caucasoid Basques. Phenotypically and genetically they were linked to the later people's (Picts, Scot, Saxons etc) who settled in Britain.

All again basic history (which time and time again you have proven you know very little about). I remember in the other thread you admitted you didn't even realise Genesis takes place in Mesopotamia. No offence but you are clearly no academic or scholar and you are entering debates that just make you look uneducated.

Hence the fossil evidence.

The Picts were an ethnic-group who arrived in Britain a few centuries BC, they did not immediately descend from the Mesolithic peoples. Ask any scholar, Pictish culture dates around 400 BC. No idea where you are getting the dates 8,000 BC or whatever. Please read a book on the Picts.

So the God of the Bible was an actual, mortal human being?

There are numerous Gods (plural) in the Bible. In fact you even in an earlier post admitted this, but according to you they never existed (?). The fact is the Bible throughout references the multiple existance of Gods. In my view these Gods all existed at some stage as mortal men (or women) which as i said has been a main view by scholars for hundreds of years (called euhemerism). My taking on religion/myth is ancestor worship or veneration of the dead. I have repeatedly explained this, and months ago claimed that i believe God was a literal 'man'. In fact i created a thread on this some while ago in Unorthodox Theology, several Christian gnostics hold similar views.

I find your understanding of theology very confusing.First you say there are many gods, now you're saying these gods were just moral humans. In a blink you've changed from polytheist to atheist.

- Mortals while on earth, not in spiritual form. I made this clear from the start. God began as a literal man 'walking' and 'talking' in Eden, does that sound something normal a supernatural entity would be doing? Of course not. Then throughout the rest of scripture God is a 'spirit'. You explain the change. The only rational explanation is through ancestor worship, i created threads on this ages ago.

Yes it is. The belief is polytheism (believing in the existance of more than one god), the practice is monolatrism (chosing to follow one god over another). The quotes I provided state that the Bible says there is only one God and there always has been. The other gods did not exist.

If other Gods don't exist, why are they referenced in scripture?

Also note the early Church claimed that the 'other Gods' were mortal men i.e who became venerated through apotheosis (exaltation to devine level after death). Exactly what i believe. However they never applied the same origin to their own 'God' which has always been an error. They also lost out on whole identity of Gods in scripture - we all become them.

Herbert Armstong partially recognised this truth.

"God wants everyone of us to eventually become like Him."

"Why should it seem strange that you will someday be the spirit-composed child of your heavenly Father? You will be what He is - God."

See Hebrews 2: 11

Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.

 

[Research3]

Just to clarify, are you saying you believe Caucasians are descended from people in the Middle East based on the DNA evidence?

Genetics is not my area, but as far as the anthropological evidence is concernced that is the geographical place of origin. Read Carleton S. Coon's The Origin of Races (1962). However on this forum you posted before you reject physical anthropology and a whole other chunk of science for political reasons, so you are like debating a brick wall.

Your arguments come from articles ... you wrote?

Articles which cite peer-reviewed academic jounals, quotes from scholars and well founded sources.

You claim something is true, link to the source, and then write / edit the source itself. All this time I thought you were merely picking the evidence you personally disagreed with, now it seems you're just making it up.

{Anglopyramidologist's user contributions}

-White Amazonian Indians
-White Aeothiopians
-Pyramidology
​

The Amazon, Ethiopia, Egypt, and of course the Middle East ... Gee, white people are all over the place. Except Britain, ironically.

Such a retarded post, i don't need to waste my time with.

And it further confirms my idea that you think about nothing else aside from race. This isn't a hobby, it's an obsession. Do you have any other interests, any at all? Trains maybe?

My area of degree is classical ethnography. Hence i add articles on ancient ethnicities. Furthermore as a Christianity Identity/British Israelite proponent my religious views are race based. Its not about obsession, its about Biblical truth hence this thread was opened up to discuss Serpent Seedline. Threads were up on CI/BI years ago, and no one could refute me then or CI/BI truth. The Liberal Christians get owned everytime.

 

[Research3]

where did he say that?

No where. The Liberal Christians have attempted to ban me for about 5 years but its never worked, so usually they post lies that distort my position. If that doesn't work they stalk or vandalise my email or (oddly) my Amazon account. And these people think they are Christians...

 

[Research3]

Slightly offtopic to thread but note the Human descriptions etc of God in scripture.

1. Human actions - changed mind, relented, remembered, rested.
2. Exodus 32:14, "So the Lord changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people."
3. 2 Sam. 24:16 "When the angel stretched out his hand toward Jerusalem to destroy it, the Lord relented from the calamity, and said to the angel who destroyed the people, “It is enough! Now relax your hand!”
4. Gen. 9:16, “When the bow is in the cloud, then I will look upon it, to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.”
5. Gen. 2:2, "And by the seventh day God completed His work which He had done; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done."
6. Human emotions - sorrow, jealousy, pity, regret.
7. Gen. 6:6, "And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart."
8. Exodus 20:5, "You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me."
9. Judges 2:18, "...for the Lord was moved to pity by their groaning because of those who oppressed and afflicted them."
10. 1 Sam. 15:35, "And Samuel did not see Saul again until the day of his death; for Samuel grieved over Saul. And the Lord regretted that He had made Saul king over Israel."
11. Human physique - hands, face, mouth, eyes, arm.
12. Exodus 7:5, "And the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I stretch out My hand on Egypt and bring out the sons of Israel from their midst.”
13. Num. 6:24, "The Lord make His face shine on you, and be gracious to you."
14. Psalm 33:6, "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their host."
15. Psalm 34:15, "The eyes of the Lord are toward the righteous, and His ears are open to their cry."
16. Psalm 89:10, "Thou Thyself didst crush Rahab like one who is slain;
    Thou didst scatter Thine enemies with Thy mighty arm."

 

[mark kennedy]

No where. The Liberal Christians have attempted to ban me for about 5 years but its never worked, so usually they post lies that distort my position. If that doesn't work they stalk or vandalise my email or (oddly) my Amazon account. And these people think they are Christians...

I'm just curious, ban you from where and your position on what exactly? I think I should tell you I'm a young earth creationist and I have spent a great deal of time discussing and debating human/chimpanzee common ancestry from both a Scriptural and scientific frame of reference. So rest assured I have no great love for Liberal Theology.

I was just wondering if your work was available online.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

- There is scriptural evidence of sexual activity in Eden in relation to the fall. Eve had Cain and Abel, but they both had different fathers. Cain's biological father was not Adam, but the 'serpent' while Abel was an Adamite.

In Genesis chapter 6, the Cainites are not called the 'son's of God' while the Sethites are. There is a distinction in descent.

I John 3: 12 - ''Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother''. Cain's father was the wicked or evil one i.e the serpent. Adam was not evil, he was only misled by the serpent.

Hang on now, are you saying that the 'serpent', known from the Revelation to be Satan, was the biological father of Cain? If that is in fact the case, you will be the first creationist I have had to challenge with regards to Adam being our first parent.

I'll hold off for now but this is getting rather curious.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Are we really going to take any of this racial nonsense seriously enough to even debate it? It's a rotting pile of pestilent fecal matter and nothing more.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[granpa]

- Here he says only white people are 'Adamites', people descended from Adam (which you disagreed with).​

- Here he writes:
"Adam was Mesopotamian (Sumerian), therefore Caucasoid".​

- Here he writes:
"Genesis is clear Adam was Caucasian through etymology ... The Bible only concerns the history and future of this one race."​

- On a different thread (under an old username) he wrote:
"Find me where the scripture says eskimos, australian aborignes, sub-saharan africans, japanese, easter islanders etc all descended from Adam..."​

-On different thread he wrote:
"The Bible was written for the Adamic race only, therefore non-Adamic peoples are not included.
Once again, i ask - if you disagree and like mainstream Christians believe Christianity is a universal religion, show me the eskimos, easter islanders, sub-saharan africans, polynesians, australian aborigines etc in scripture.
Remember you appear to be defending monogenism and universalism here, so if that is the case show me in scripture where all the above races are mentioned. If Christianity is a 'universal' religion, for everyone, show me where all these races are mentioned in scripture."​

- [EDIT] He explicitly claims here (on another different thread) that non-white people cannot be Christians:
"Paul then spread Christianity to several non-Israelite nations, however these nations were still Adamic. Do you really think Paul traveled to India, China, Australia or North America? Those populations living there were never meant to be Christians."

But you don't need to take my word for it, ask him.​

Even if adam was the father of white people I believe that he would still be the father of all people alive today.

The original members of homo sapiens were probably Negroes.

I am curious to know what you base this on. Surely you don't think that just because Africa today is populated with blacks and our earliest ancestors were from Africa that they were necessarily black. Thats a bit simplistic.


chimpanzees are born white and become black as they age.
at some point hominids evolved that remained white throughout life.
this is called neoteny.

Since all modern blacks are born black and remain black it seems more probable that they (modern blacks) evolved from whites at least once in Africa and possibly a second time in India.

I see a connection between cain (cayin) and Alcyoneus