[Brother Presswood]

Originally Posted by chette777

Press,

first what mark would God place on a man that if any man saw it they would know it was Cain lets say from 200 feet?

The fact is, my friend, we may never know the answer to this until we get to glory. We must be careful not to read something into the text that just isn't there.

How do you know they all died in the flood? could not they have intermixed with Adams grand sons and daughter's or even Noah's sons?

It is my opinion, based on the chronology of Genesis 5 & 6, that Noah's son's were married in Seth's godly lineage before Genesis 6:2, when Cain's descendants inter-married with Seth's descendants, which is fodder for another debate, I realize.

If this is the case, Noah's family, including daughters-in-law, were all descendants of Seth; all of Cain's seed died in the flood.

but if you think that Cains whole race died in the flood and in no way had husband or mixed via one of Noah's sons or the wives of Noah's sons you would be wrong

First, you are arguing from silence. There is simply no scriptural support for this belief.

even our current nature shows nation mixing to be prevalent. as in the days of Noah so shall it be in the coming of the Son of man.

Secondly, you discount the providential working of God to preserve unto Himself a godly seed.

[chette777]

press,
Let's move this to another thread.

only men are recorded in the Noah's genealogy. so you are reading into the text that all the wives came from Seth. so what you are saying is It is ok for you to "read into the text" but for others they need to be careful?

Seth did not have a godly line. 99.9 percent of them died in the flood. so much for godly line theory.

again it is ok for you to argue from silence but everyone else it is wrong.

It was only Noah that found grace in the eyes of the LORD not his sons. they and their wives got a benefit for submitting to their father and husband. Just as my children who if not saved or before they got saved benefited the blessings of the Lord for my sacrificial service to the Lord's work.

After they went forth there sure wasn't a whole lot of godliness going on for the people quickly perverted themselves and were found in disobedience to the Lord's command. So much for God's sovereignty in preserving himself a godly seed. and the seed of Seth or Noah sons or that of Christ would not be affected by Cain's seed. Unless you think Cains father was Satan.

Please answer in another thread. Just start it and let me know where you went to.

[Brother Presswood]

Originally Posted by chette777

only men are recorded in the Noah's genealogy. so you are assuming they all came from Seth.

I am assuming that all the men listed in Genesis five, all the way to Noah and his three sons are all descendants of Seth, yes. I believe the Bible clearly indicates this.

and to say the daughter all came from seth is to read intot he text your bias-ness so what you are saying is It is ok for you to "read into the text" but for others they need to be careful

If I resort to conjecture, I will always indicate that it is my opinion, as I did relative to the daughters-in-law of Noah. Again, I base that on the chronology of chapters five and six.

Seth did not have a godly line. 99.9 percent of them died in the flood. so much for godly line theory.

Genesis 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
I believe this clearly indicates that a godly seed was indeed preserved in the lineage of Seth,

again it is ok for you to argue from silence but everyone else it is wrong.

Not at all; it is a weak argument regardless who resorts to using it. It is certainly your prerogative to assume that I did this myself. You'll have to pardon me if I disagree with you.

[chette777]

go back an reread I clarified it was all the wives came from seth.

where are any women mentioned in the Genealogy of Gen 5 or 6?

One just man doesn't make a godly line

It is ok to disagree but I should be allowed to use silence as you do or to read into it if you do.

I based all my opinions on the scripture as well.

[Brother Tim]

Chette, I am not going to pick at this sore too much longer, but it was you who attached Canaan's curse of slavery to all Hamites. That simply does not exist in Scripture. You are the one trying to attach black slavery with the curse.

Secondly, there are TWO uses of the word "knew". It does not always indicate that sex is involved.

In every instance of the use of the word knew with nakedness and that that goes on when a couple is naked shows that Noah Knew that his son Ham had done something that was sexual in nature. that according to the use of God's words of which we are to study.

This makes absolutely no sense!

"Adam knew his wife", "Cain knew his wife" - These are clearly intercourse. [ a very obvious word pattern!]

"Noah awoke ..., and knew what his younger son had done unto him." Completely different use of the word "knew", that is, this is the more common use meaning "was aware of, had knowledge of", not "had intercourse with". UNLESS you would like to explain this verse differently based on your claim, "In every instance of the use of the word knew with nakedness..."?!?[bold mine]

Genesis 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Or this?!?(unborn babies are naked)

Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

A little ridiculous, don't you think?

[Brother Tim]

Chette, are you saying that Cain's mark was that he was black?

[chette777]

No it is not a little ridiculous as the word knew and know are uses more to refer to sexual activity. you would have to deny Gods word. and it is obvious that it was sexual because there is nakedness involved, and the Knew what his son had did surely indicated it was sexual in nature.

no, I am not saying the mark was black. I asked if anyone knew then I figured it was the wrong place so I removed it. I have know Idea what the mark was but it would have to be seen from at least 200 feet. so those who saw him would not kill him.

We may have linked a nation of people together in our post but we never used the word black. but you can't say you don't know where the black nation came from. we all know the Ham is the father of black nations. even the Hebrew today know it. Ask any Jew who is the father of the Black nations and they will tell you HAM.

[chette777]

Tim,

We may have made references to a Nation of people who could have or could not have been carrying the curse of Noah. But when you guys so quickly called me a racist and a bigot for what I believe. You bashed me for just saying what i believed and then you write a pointed remark like this, " basing one's belief or view of life on conjecture is wrong".

What happened here? double standard of Tim? you still have to conjecture if I am right or wrong so you bash me call me a racist and a bigot.

I made my apology and you don't want it.

[chette777]

I just don't think it was so fair that you all jumped the band wagon and called me a racist and bigot. even some referred to white supremacy of which I definitely don't hold to. I may believe what I said to be true by my study of God's word. but I do not hold racist hatred towards Hamites.

It was quite cruel of you all to label me such.

I apology for it was not my attempt to give such.

[George]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

"Where are the posters, George and others, that examine the exactness of God's words, and yet are silent with this absolute distortion of Scripture?

Underlining and bold mine for emphasis:Can someone show me, Chette, Solomon, or others, WHERE the entire family of Ham was cursed??? ONE man's decendents, Canaan's, were cursed. These are NOT identified as all black-skinned people!!!

It is apparent that some among us have fallen into the trap of bigotry.

Who are the Canaanites (who received the curse)?


Refer again to verse 19. Is any of this territory in Africa???

This idea of equating the black-skinned person with the curse of Canaan is false, ignorant, and shameful. It needs to be retracted and rejected! "

Brother Tim,

WHY have you singled me out (out of ALL the "active" members)? Am I obligated (in any way) to comment on every single issue that crops up on this Forum?

I do not have time today, but I will answer your question - and then I will have a "question" for you!

In the mean time - I have maintained for some time now that a society's (whether a Country, a State, a City, a Town, or even institutions like Schools, Churches, Clubs, etc.) "BELIEF SYSTEM" produces a "CULTURE", and that "CULTURE", in turn, produces the form of GOVERNMENT that will govern that society: Witness the predominately Roman Catholic Countries in South America, Central America, Mexico, the Caribbean, the Philippines and Western Europe; witness the Eastern Orthodox Countries of Eastern Europe and Asia; witness the Hindu Countries of Asia; witness the Buddhist Countries of Asia; witness the Confucian Countries of Asia; and witness the Islamic Countries of the Mid-East; Africa; Asia; and Indonesia.
{This is WHY it is "FUTILE" to try to "DEMOCRATIZE" an Islamic Country!}

Our own country has undergone a radical "SHIFT" in it's "BELIEF SYSTEM" (Look at our elected "leaders" ) in the last one hundred years (from a basically Judeao/Christian "BELIEF SYSTEM" to a HUMANISTIC "BELIEF SYSTEM" - This is WHY it is "FUTILE" to try to "CHANGE" the "SYSTEM" (i.e. Government) from within! ) WHAT a nation's people "BELIEVE" is reflected in the form of Government they have and the Character of its leaders!

I shall answer your question, but I WONDER WHY you singled me out - out of all the people on this Forum????

2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.