jstriker442:
oga read gen 4 vs 1. Then pls tell me who d BIBLE said is d father of cain (quote yr bible)

stop claiming u r a spirit filled christian

..... Anticipating yr answer

Don't misquote me.. i never said i go to church more than any other person,
Lemme tell u something, i no read bible pass anybody but i understand it better than most people like u.
I'm not down for any argument with u cos the winner won't receive a prize money.
I've never read all books in the bible, not even completed 2 books in it but i've read one which makes my understanding firm.
My advice to you is get a Good News Bible & read the book of Sirach from the beginning to the end.
Whenever u're done, u don't need to let me know.. i bet u, u would read it again and again and again... and u will thank me forever.

gen 4:1 clearly states Adam slept with eve and gave birth to Cain..d more reason Cain is Neva mentioned is because he was banished for killing Abel same way ham is hardly mentioned among d descendants of Noah cos of his own act which led to his dismissal..for those quoting d new testament as proof of Satan being Cains father let me ask u a question then..Jude 1;14 states enoch is the 7th from adam so does that mean seth manufactured kids from d sky??the answer is no cos Adam also had other kids apart from Seth..for the guy above me mentioning sirach,kindly read d book of jubilees also.

pikapizy:
one of the few people thinking with his head . the bible went further to say least they put forth their hand and eat of the tree of life too and become like God . was that refering to another sex ? Funny how ignorant people claim superwise .. research what you don't know .. Earth was created to be an extension of Heaven . it was supposed to be a colony of Heaven but man broke forth to have his independent . he became fully in charge of his choices . a revolution broke forth

How could earth be an extension of heaven, when we were told Satan was thrown of heaven, don't you think Satan was on earth prior man's sin.

jstriker442:
u r quoting irrv. Things. Read gen 4 vs 1 and tell me who d bible said gave birth to cain.

if u tink i didn't read the bible before saying that then u must be very naive in thinking. what am trying hard not to tell u is that i have read beyond the bible. i hope u don't want to open the lame talk about how the bible is totally complete? if u do that i shall have to interview u before i respond to u again.

reeblaze:
I agree with you .....This ain't the first time I have heard it......I mean....guys reason it......how can fruit reveal things to people?

Man you are officially the most myopic mind on this thread.

KingAdegoke:
So people actually think this Eden story happened for real?

Oh my God. what is wrong with black people.

see me tomorow morning and collect your American visa
hahahaha americana

LordXaaan:

Man you are officially the most myopic mind on this thread.

If yhu don't understand fact hidden in parables.....shut up and listen......

notoriousbabe:
Wetin e be if e no be sex?na sex jo and na touch your toe dem do

OK which one be touch your toe?

I need an explanation.

buffalowings:


OK which one be touch your toe?

I need an explanation.

I be Google?no let me vex for you o

notoriousbabe:
I be Google?no let me vex for you o

I'm serious
I ain't feigning ignorance

Na you talk am nau

buffalowings:


I'm serious
I ain't feigning ignorance

Na you talk am nau

he be like sey dirty slap dey hungry you?

stancydg:

Good question sir. First, God put the tree of THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DIFFERENCE BTW GOOD AND EVIL. (Amp), in the garden, in order to give man what is called ' CHOICE' . Otherwise, man would be a mere robot, doing God's instructions without personal conviction. Spiritual law required that of God, and from what we know about God, He never forces folks to do stuff. He puts before you the options and says like Joshua said: CHOOSE YOU THIS DAY.
To your second question, God didn't remain pissed off. Intact, he made an alternative plan to rescue man, even before the deed happened, because He is all knowing. The word says : The lamb was slain BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. That means my use of the word 'alternative' is even inadequate. The right word would be 'PLAN B' or in the words of risk managers, 'WHAT IF PLAN', because you see my bros, GOD CAN NEVER BE CAUGHT UNAWARES BY SATAN. That's the reason Satan was so shocked when JESUS appeared on the scene and defeated him on the cross. So, God saw you and made more than adequate plans for you to be saved and guess what, He made it so so so easy. All you gotta do is SIMPLY ACCEPT JESUS CHRIST INTO YOUR LIFE, by CONFESSING RIGHT NOW, THAT HE IS LORD OF YOUR LIFE. It is as simple as saying that prayer. Note: the confession part is important. Make sure you say it and BELIEVE IT IN YOUR HEART. It makes you INSTANTLY BORN AFRESH, in what is popularly referred to as being BORN AGAIN. This is because Jesus used the exact word when explaining to a curious fellow like you, that the only way man can be saved from the corrupted seed introduced into the woman, through what some folks now call 'sex' is A NEW KIND OF BIRTH, WHICH WILL INTRODUCE A NEW KIND OF NATURE. THE NATURE OF GOD, INSTEAD OF the nature of sin(Satan). That is why Christianity is NOT A RELIGION. Christianity properly defined is PARTAKING OF THE DIVINE(GOD) NATURE. That is why born afresh Christians can NO LONGER SIN. Because, they have a new nature, the nature of God that doesn't sin. There is nothing they can ever do again to piss God off, because God ONLY SEES THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE MAN(JESUS), WHO STOOD ON BEHALF OF ALL BORN AGAIN FELLOWS OVER TWO THOUSAND YEARS AGO. He can't see their sins again. He has covered it out of His sight by the blood of Jesus. Can you see how MUCH GOD LOVES YOU NOW? pls call or Whatsapp 07034643328 for more insight. God bless you.

LoveJesus87:
This is the most ridiculous and funniest piece of writing I have ever read. Honestly. Are you for real please? Wow. Even if this was a joke, its completely bizarre. Please on a more serious note, Are you for real??

mpeg:

Can someone please explain this: "you may eat all other fruits in the garden but except this one in the middle of the Garden....
What about all other fruits that they has been eating?? Is that one romance without having sex? I am asking those scholars that said that they had sex.....
Secondly what about the other tree which has the fruit of life in it? The Bible said that they were chased away from the garden so that they will not eat the fruit of life and become immortal....
Remember they Bible also said that the very fruit of life is been guided by Angels with sword..
Come think of it.... When you go to The book of revelation, they were now allow to have assess to that very tree of life, after when they most have succeed the things of the world

nocosomia:

I strongly disagree with that;
Genesis 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
I strongly dissagree with this
Is sex gud for food?
The woman firstly ate it herself as stated by scriptures
This is food not sex
This is food here being spoken about
A fruit in the normal sense of food
Something eaten in the form of food as we do all eat food.

lordmayor2013:
A student recently asked after reading the temptation and fall of Adam and Eve, “The Bible didn’t say the fruit was an apple. Why do we say Adam and Eve ate an apple?”

I am always happy to see when a student not only does a careful reading but also thinks about the reading they are given. In order to answer the student’s question it helps to understand

1. We do not really know with certainty the kind of fruit Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. I’ve heard it suggested the fruit was a fig or a pomegranate. Whatever the fruit was, it would have to be tempting on a number of levels: pleasing to the eyes, good for food, and good for gaining knowledge. Obviously most fruits, at least those found in supermarkets today, can be seen as pleasing to the eyes and good for food, but I’m not sure what earthly fruit is good for gaining knowledge.

2. The Bible has gone through many translations. This tradition of Adam and Eve eating an apple did not surface till sometime after St. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin. This brings us to the tradition of the Apple. The Latin word for “evil” is “malum.” The “a” in “malum” is pronounced with a short “a” as the “a” in “multa” The Latin word for “apple” is “malum” – spelled the same as the Latin word for “evil.” The differences being in parts of speech one as an adjective and the other a noun and how “malum” (apple) is pronounced. “Malum” (apple) has a long “a” which is pronounced more like the "a" in "father"
So in short, the reason Adam and Eve are said to have eaten an apple is that it is a play on words in the Latin language that has remained in popular use even to today.

bugzygee:
gen 4:1 clearly states Adam slept with eve and gave birth to Cain..d more reason Cain is Neva mentioned is because he was banished for killing Abel same way ham is hardly mentioned among d descendants of Noah cos of his own act which led to his dismissal..for those quoting d new testament as proof of Satan being Cains father let me ask u a question then..Jude 1;14 states enoch is the 7th from adam so does that mean seth manufactured kids from d sky??the answer is no cos Adam also had other kids apart from Seth..for the guy above me mentioning sirach,kindly read d book of jubilees also.

lordmayor2013:
A student recently asked after reading the temptation and fall of Adam and Eve, “The Bible didn’t say the fruit was an apple. Why do we say Adam and Eve ate an apple?”

I am always happy to see when a student not only does a careful reading but also thinks about the reading they are given. In order to answer the student’s question it helps to understand

1. We do not really know with certainty the kind of fruit Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. I’ve heard it suggested the fruit was a fig or a pomegranate. Whatever the fruit was, it would have to be tempting on a number of levels: pleasing to the eyes, good for food, and good for gaining knowledge. Obviously most fruits, at least those found in supermarkets today, can be seen as pleasing to the eyes and good for food, but I’m not sure what earthly fruit is good for gaining knowledge.

2. The Bible has gone through many translations. This tradition of Adam and Eve eating an apple did not surface till sometime after St. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin. This brings us to the tradition of the Apple. The Latin word for “evil” is “malum.” The “a” in “malum” is pronounced with a short “a” as the “a” in “multa” The Latin word for “apple” is “malum” – spelled the same as the Latin word for “evil.” The differences being in parts of speech one as an adjective and the other a noun and how “malum” (apple) is pronounced. “Malum” (apple) has a long “a” which is pronounced more like the "a" in "father"
So in short, the reason Adam and Eve are said to have eaten an apple is that it is a play on words in the Latin language that has remained in popular use even to today.

All the confusion of thought and conflicting exegesis have arisen from taking literally what is expressed by Figures, or from taking figuratively what is literal. A Figure of speech is never used except for the purpose of calling attention to, emphasising, and intensifying, the reality of the literal sense, and the truth of the historical facts; so that, while the words employed may not be so strictly true to the letter, they are all the more true to the truth conveyed by them, and to the historical events connected with them.
But for the figurative language of verses 14 and 15 no one would have thought of referring the third chapter of Genesis to a snake: no more than he does when reading the third chapter from the end of Revelation (chapter 20:2). Indeed, the explanation added there, that the "old serpent" is the Devil and Satan, would immediately lead one to connect the word "old" with the earlier and former mention of the serpent in Genesis 3: and the fact that it was Satan himself who tempted "the second man", "the last Adam", would force the conclusion that no other than the personal Satan could have been the tempter of "the first man, Adam".
The Hebrew word rendered "serpent" in Genesis 3:1 is Nachash (from the root Nachash, to shine), and means a shinning one. Hence, in Chaldee it means brass or copper, because of its shining. Hence also, the word Nehushtan, a piece of brass, in
2Kings 18:4.
In the same way Saraph, in Isaiah 6:2, 6, means a burning one, and, because the serpents mentioned in Numbers 21 were burning, in the poison of their bite, they were called Saraphim, or Seraphs.
But when the LORD said unto Moses, "Make thee a fiery serpent" (Numbers 21:, He said, "Make thee a Saraph", and, in obeying this command, we read in verse 9, "Moses made a Nachash of brass".
Nachash is thus used as being interchangeable with
Saraph.
Now, if Saraph is used of a serpent because its bite was burning, and is also used of a celestial or spirit-being (a burning one), why should not
Nachash be used of a serpent because its appearance was shining, and be also used of a celestial or spirit-being (a shining one)?
Indeed, a reference to the structure of Genesis 3 (on page 7 of the Companion Bible) will show that the Cherubim (which are similar celestial or spirit-beings) of the last verse (Genesis 3:24) require a similar spirit-being to correspond with them in the first verse (for the structure of the whole chapter is a great Introversion). The Nachash, or serpent, who beguiled Eve (2Corinthians 11:3) is spoken of as "an angel of light" in verse 14. Have we not, in this, a clear intimation that it was not a snake, but a glorious shining being, apparently an angel, to whom Eve paid such great deference, acknowledging him as one who seemed to possess superior knowledge, and who was evidently a being of a superior (not of an inferior) order? Moreover, in the description of Satan as "the king of Tyre" ¹ it is distinctly implied that the latter being was of a super-natural order when he is called "a cherub" (Ezekiel
____________________________
¹ Ezekiel 28:11-19, who is quite a different being from "the Prince of Tyre", in verses 1-10 who is purely human.
28:14, 16, read from verses 11-19). His presence "in Eden, the garden of 'Elohim" (verse 13), is also clearly stated, as well as his being "perfect in beauty" (verse 12), his being "perfect in his ways from the day he was created till iniquity was found in him" (verse 15), and as being "lifted up because of his beauty" (verse 17).
These all compel the belief that Satan was the shining one (Nachash) in Genesis 3, and especially because the following words could be addressed to him:—"Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee" (verse 17).
Even supposing that these things were spoken to, and of, an exalted human being in later days (Ezekiel 28), still "the king of Tyre" is not compared to a being who was non-existent; and facts and circumstances which never happened are not introduced into the comparison.
There is more about "the king of Tyre" in Ezekiel 28:11-19 than was literally true of "the prince of Tyre" (verses 1-10). The words can be understood only of the mightiest and most exalted supernatural being that God ever created; and this for the purpose of showing how great would be his fall. The history must be true to make the prophecy of any weight. with this it is suffice to say the snake came in form of a being to lay eve

KingAdegoke:
So people actually think this Eden story happened for real?

Oh my God. what is wrong with black people.

Dead