forum.christogenea.org

_______________________

Assuming there is enough interest, perhaps an Old Testament Discussion thread [a "brother" to the New Testament Discussion thread] could be opened?

Good idea, will do!

thanks much.

Now, for the first thread.......

_______________________

And Adam knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord (Genesis 4:1)

Most people take this verse to mean, 1. Adam "knew" his wife Eve; 2. Eve conceived Cain; 3. Eve gave birth to Cain and 4. Eve said Cain was a man from the Lord.

Why is this not the correct interpretation?

____

The problem is that most people do not realize that the Hebrew behind this verse is corrupt. Because of this, by necessity, any translation of it has serious shortcomings. While the Septuagint seems to ignore the gloss in the Hebrew of this verse and makes an attempt to translate it literally, early translators of the Scripture into Aramaic understood that there were problems, and attempted to fill in the blanks. All of this is discussed at length by Clifton Emahiser in his paper, The Problem With Genesis 4:1.
Hope this helps,
Bill

________________________________

http://emahiser.christogenea.org/Gen315/The%20Problem%20With%20Genesis%204-1 is beyond the reading and comprehension skills of most people.

I had already read the link posted, and agree with the plain words that Clifton Emahiser provided near the end of that rather esoteric explanation and, btw, agree with it.

But, honestly, to tell others that Genesis 4:1 of KJV of the Bible is "unintelligible" and can "scarcely be translated, still less understood," will go over with 99.9 % of the "Christians" I know as well as "Jesus was not a Jew" will.

A further problem proceeds from saying that even the Hebrew in this verse can not be trusted is this: it is often said that translations are not inspired, the original language, in this case Hebrew, is. Then, we say, well, in this instance, the Hebrew "can scarcely be trusted," is "unintelligible" and otherwise untrustworthy.

Detractors are, quite likely, going to respond: "so, Genesis 4:1 in the Hebrew, is not inspired of God?" and "You're changing Scripture to suit your doctrine of CI?"

That is, no doubt, why tying Genesis 4:1 in with the other verses dealing with Cain, such as Genesis 4:6,7, Jude 11 and John 8:44 is so important.

Thanks for your reply. Thanks too to Clifton Emahiser for his "The Problem with Genesis 4:1"

Dear Zenas,
You are absolutely correct, and I could not have said it any better. But detractors will always have something to grouse about. Which is why the verses you pointed out are excellent, for there is no second witness with which to corroborate the texts (as they stand) on Genesis 4:1, and we have a multitude of witnesses that refute the text on Genesis 4:1! Out of the mouth of two witnesses, even three, is a matter established.

_________________________________

The Scofield Reference Bible - in heading notes preceding Ezekiel 38 states:

Prophecy against Gog: future invasion of Palestine by northern confederacy


Further, in the footnote to verse 2, referring to Gog, Scofield, or the editors, state, inter alia:

The reference is to the powers in the north of Europe, headed by Russia..... Gog is probably the prince;, Magog, his land. etc.

How does Scofield "know" this? [The more I read Scofield, in light of a CI background, the more male cow dung I sniff.]

Ezekiel 37 and 38 has numerous references to Israel. This is not the Israel in today's Palestine, is it? If so, how does one know, or is this info unknowable at this time?

I would think reference to Israel, would be to the people of Israel, which would be the 12 Tribes, not the name of the "hole in the wall" - Israel - used by the gang of criminals we know as the so-called jews.

Who or what or where is Gog? And Magog, for that matter.

Admittedly, Gog and Magog has always been confusing to me. Anybody able to 'unconfuse' these terms for me, and, I'm sure, many others? Any light that one can shed on this topic much appreciated.

Zenas,

The oldest references I have found thus far concerning the identity of Gog, Magog and the Kingdom of the North is circa 700AD and it is in reference to the Khazars. As you probably already know, most people who claim to be Jews today are descended from the Khazars.

In light of this, it would appear that the prophesy has already been fulfilled, with the Khazars (Jews) invading both the New JerUSAlem and ancient Judea.

JamesTheJust wrote:Zenas,

The oldest references I have found thus far concerning the identity of Gog, Magog and the Kingdom of the North is circa 700AD and it is in reference to the Khazars. As you probably already know, most people who claim to be Jews today are descended from the Khazars.

In light of this, it would appear that the prophesy has already been fulfilled, with the Khazars (Jews) invading both the New JerUSAlem and ancient Judea.

Magog Gen. 10. Gomer and Ashkenaz are descendents of Magog and yes they are found in the exact geographical area that the Bible indicates and that is southern Russia i.e. Khazars, now these people are mogrelized with dark asian races, mongols, turks, etc, they are not pure Japhethic, they have also mixed with the Edomite serpents that came out of Babylon and Persia, so they are a real hybrid alien creature, wicked and depraved.