The line of Cain survived the Flood

[Rescued One]

Phoebe's attacks on the idea that some of the tribes of Israel migrated to Europe in ancient times.

The mainstream idea is that Ham stayed in Africa, Shem in the Middle East (western Asia), and for some reason only tribes descended from Japheth went out and populated Europe, central and eastern Asia, and the Americas I suppose.

Of course, if the tribe of Ephraim did not become many nations, that would make the prophecy given in Genesis 48:19 untrue, but I guess that's okay with some people.

British-Israelism is a figment of a lunatic's imagination.

 

[Zadok7000]

If the snake literally had sex with Eve, he was a literal snake. Explain to me how a snake has sex with a human. If the snake was only figuratively a snake, then you cannot insist that he literally had sex with Eve.

Your logic doesn't make sense.
We know that the Serpent is one of Satan's names (Rev. 12, Rev. 20). Isn't he also the Tree of Knowledge as Christ was the Tree of Life in Eden?

 

[Zadok7000]

But NOT by different fathers, Right?

My mother and uncle share the same father, but it's not required. It's called Heteropaternal Superfecundation.
Twins with Different Fathers - Heteropaternal Superfecundation

 

[Zadok7000]

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: 4And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:

Neither are any of these "sons and daughters" listed in Adam's genealogy. Why is that? So according to scripture Adam and Eve had (1) Cain (2) Abel (3) Seth (4) SONS AND DAUGHTERS (whose names are ???) The family tree or genealogy argument is very weak.

Cain was the firstborn. If his father was Adam, he would be in his geneaology. But Cain was not in Adam's "likeness" or "image". They "started over" with Seth since Abel was Adam's first son but was killed before fathering any children of his own.

 

[Zadok7000]

No where in Genesis does it state that Eve partook of an apple. Just another fable.

Exactly.

 

[RufustheRed]

Cain was the firstborn. If his father was Adam, he would be in his genealogy. But Cain was not in Adam's "likeness" or "image". They "started over" with Seth since Abel was Adam's first son but was killed before fathering any children of his own.

Why do you say that? What specific rule of genealogy requires that the first born of any family must be listed in some descending ahnentafel ? What if the first born in a specific family happens to be female? Why, pray tell, are the "sons and daughters" that Adam begat (Ref: Gen 5:4) not listed in Adam's genealogy?

There are a lot of exceptions that can refute your theory of genealogical listings. It appears that you are doing a lot of speculation in an attempt to make your bible fit your theology.

Have a great day.

Rufus

 

[RufustheRed]

Exactly.

So why do you put it there? Apples absolutely nothing to with this thread and is therefore off topic.

Rufus

 

[Zadok7000]

So why do you put it there? Apples absolutely nothing to with this thread and is therefore off topic.

Rufus

Where did I say apple? Or any other fruit for that matter?

 

[John Christian V]

British-Israelism is a figment of a lunatic's imagination.

Okay, sure. So, we should just ignore any and all evidence of Israelites migrating north and west out of the Middle East in ancient times?

 

[Rescued One]

Okay, sure. So, we should just ignore any and all evidence of Israelites migrating north and west out of the Middle East in ancient times?

You can't take non-evidence of British-Israelism and fabricate the basis for it and expect us to believe it.

 

[Rescued One]

My mother and uncle share the same father, but it's not required. It's called Heteropaternal Superfecundation.
Twins with Different Fathers - Heteropaternal Superfecundation

First off, the argument in this thread is that Abel was Adam's son because Adam knew his wife Eve. If that makes Abel Adam's son then Cain is not Satan's son because Satan never KNEW Eve.

Second, all men descend from Adam. If all men do not descend from Adam, some men do not die spiritually. Where is a list of Satan's descendants? Nowhere.

Who were all of Adam's children? There names are not listed. Why?

"And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain"...that's one sentence. Not a word about Satan.

"And she again bare his brother Abel." Not a word about Adam knowing her resulting in this birth.

"And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died."

 

[John Christian V]

You can't take non-evidence of British-Israelism and fabricate the basis for it and expect us to believe it.

Which part is fabricated? You saying that the people called the Jutes did not exist, and that they did not accompany the Anglo-Saxons when they arrived in the British Isles?

 

[Rescued One]

Which part is fabricated? You saying that the people called the Jutes did not exist, and that they did not accompany the Anglo-Saxons when they arrived in the British Isles?

The genealogy is fabricated. There is no evidence that anyone in ancient Britain came from the tribe of Ephraim. Jutes came from Jutland(Cimbria), no doubt.

 

[Zadok7000]

First off, the argument in this thread is that Abel was Adam's son because Adam knew his wife Eve. If that makes Abel Adam's son then Cain is not Satan's son because Satan never KNEW Eve.

Satan did "know" Eve. You just refuse to accept it because of man's un-Biblical traditions.

Second, all men descend from Adam. If all men do not descend from Adam, some men do not die spiritually. Where is a list of Satan's descendants? Nowhere.

Cain and his progeny are listed for that very reason. "Ye are of your father the devil"; the "synogogue of Satan".

Who were all of Adam's children? There names are not listed. Why?

Firstborn son is how the Bible accounts for generations. Abel was killed before he bore children, so Seth was counted as Adam's firstborn. Cain, not Adam's son, has a totally different line.

 

[Rescued One]

Satan did "know" Eve. You just refuse to accept it because of man's un-Biblical traditions.

It is childish to argue this way (assuming another's reasons) since not one person on earth is omniscient.

Cain and his progeny are listed for that very reason. "Ye are of your father the devil"; the "synogogue of Satan".

Being of Satan has nothing to do with genealogy, Zadok. Not one person can trace his geneaology to Adam or Seth with any accuracy nor can you trace anyone's genealogy to Cain.

Firstborn son is how the Bible accounts for generations. Abel was killed before he bore children, so Seth was counted as Adam's firstborn. Cain, not Adam's son, has a totally different line.

There is no reputable genealogy from the present day to any son of Adam.

 

[John Christian V]

The genealogy is fabricated. There is no evidence that anyone in ancient Britain came from the tribe of Ephraim. Jutes came from Jutland(Cimbria), no doubt.

How do you know for sure they weren't of the tribe of Judah?

 

[Rescued One]

How do you know for sure they weren't of the tribe of Judah?

Why would anyone jump to the conclusion that they were?

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Why would anyone jump to the conclusion that they were?

Ideological bias.

No other reason. It has about as much credible weight as me saying that Caucasians are descended from Cain and that Cain was the offspring of Sasquatch and the Tooth Fairy.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[John Christian V]

Why would anyone jump to the conclusion that they were?

You aren't even willing to consider the possibility. You haven't argued against any of the evidence. You just went and found websites which supported your preconceived idea that the Lost Tribes of Israel could not have migrated to Europe in ancient times. Your mind is not open to the idea whatsoever. So, there's no point in having a discussion with you.

 

[Dionysiou]

You aren't even willing to consider the possibility. You haven't argued against any of the evidence. You just went and found websites which supported your preconceived idea that the Lost Tribes of Israel could not have migrated to Europe in ancient times. Your mind is not open to the idea whatsoever. So, there's no point in having a discussion with you.

hey mate, anythings possible i suppose