might want to check your cain, cainan, caanan and more before a conclusion
there were more then one cainan-however it's spelled
one was the son of enos
one was the son of ham
one was the son of arphaxad
more i suspect...
This is what I don't understand. If the "sins are of the fathers blood” and Noah was from Abel's “bloodline” rather than Cain's seed, how could Noah's sons then be of the lineage of Cain?
28And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
29And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
30And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:
31And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
32And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
28And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
29And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
30And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:
31And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
32And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Ok, you have convincing evidence that Cainan was named after Cain but how does being Noe's son make him of the bloodline of Cain?
Until that quite simple question is answered, I must still conclude that if all life was destroyed in the flood except for Noe and his family... then the bloodline of Cain was severed.
So the only way Cain could have existed after the flood was if some were to pick up and revive his priestly order.
So in other words, the surviving Cain passed over the flood as “a spirit.” i.e. Melchisedec. Cain figuratively "walked on water" to survive after the flood through his priestly order.
It is an interesting note in the logic, that Abel's bloodline was also severed, Even if Abel had unrecorded offspring prior to his death they still would have been destroyed in the flood. It is interesting to reason that Abel's priestly order was "raised from the dead"... and re-instituted after his death, probably by Seth.
Thus neither order Cain/Abel had a literal bloodline after the flood.
Also, through Seth, two orders would be reborn into one.
One must then question why did God create two orders to oppose each other in the first place?
The heavens/and the earth, energy/matter, male/female, Adam/Eve, Cain/Abel, flesh/blood, bread/wine, liberty/law... Then the fathers/mothers of these orders become cursed and die and the surviving offspring, Seth (of neither Cain or Abel's bloodline), leads to eventually uniting both orders in a neutered body, soul and spirit, through Christ Jesus.
It seems if there is not rebirth involved God is not present, back to zero (zygote).
Zero creates one comprised of two, as intelligence creates learning; out of learning, wisdom and spirituality are fused and reborn...
Romans 10:9 KJV
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Comment:
To confess is to "say the same thing".
To take two orders, mouth/heart and merge them into one though the lord Jesus Christ/Christ Jesus.
The order of mouth/words/laws/knowledge/flesh and blood, and the order of the heart/faith/spirit/wine and bread.
The story leads me back to Cain and Abel... Two brothers, one who kills the other in a conflict of ego...
...In the story of the prodigal son, God seems to prefer the wayward son (order of faith), once dead to him, over the obedient son (order of law).
Ephesians 2:8 KJV
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Christ himself said he would destroy this temple and raise it up.
So for something to be destroyed, killed or die doesn't mean it's gone,
or annihilated forever.
I don't understand what you mean, or pointing out, by Noah being of the bloodline of Cain. Maybe I missed a comment or verse somewhere.
As for blood, you may recall that Abel's blood cried from the ground.
10And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
11And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand
Certainly more to see then what's on the surface, but it seems that 'blood' has some sort of life to it. Hoping to steer a bit away from the life of the flesh is in the blood and more toward life itself and the fact that it continues.
'Earth' seems quite significant as well as it is doing something here.
Which has me thinking about the flood covering the earth. Of which the flood has many different perspectives of what it actually was and what really happened.
I can even think of the Earth entering into a womb of a sort....concerning the flood - or covering even.
1) the judeo-christian account of the emergence of humanity (i.e. the book of Genesis in the modern Bible) most-likely has a very strong ethnocentric filter on it. In other words...it is NOT a tale of the whole planet-wide human race...although the writers at the time may have thought so. And there are other people's and cultures and histories that are OUTSIDE of the biblical geneological date-set. To avoid these in all theological consideration is to look at the history of man/God/religion through a very very tiny pinhole...and reduces the value of the Bible about the same amount.
2) i have often thought of the story of Cain and Abel as an early expression of the clash of Agrarian society versus Hunter-Gatherer society. The hunter-gathers (Abel) were "blessed by God at the time" because they honored what they killed and their lifestyle was generally sustainable and did not deforest the world. The agrarians (Cain) were not "blessed by God at the time" because their lifestyle generally caused desertification. Of course, this is a very broad generalization...because neither hunter-gather or agrarian are wholly good or evil.
But the general relationship patterns between the two societies certainly seems clear. The story of Cain and Abel is very much like the story of European Colonists and Native Americans. For some reason, the so-called civilized agrarian group mistakenly thinks the hunter-gatherers are "doing nothing with the land," and see no reason why they should be so blessed for being so "lazy."
And the native blood spilled all over the soil of this country never stops speaking. Much like revenge and grief for violence will keep hold of an entire nation for generations, keeping them angry and at war with each other. Call it karma, call it nature...but the blood of ALL injustice seeps back into our lives. Quite a curse. Millions of people building cities on top of bloody ground are never going to find rest or peace until there is some authentic atonement. "oh, that was hundreds of years ago" is like saying "i am not my brother's keeper." ...many are going to wish they had some of that "wisdom of the natives" when the systems come crashing down.
3) Offspring is not as much about bloodline...as it is about those who inherit a worldview, and lifestyle practices. Not merely my body, but also the shape of my worldview is passed on via language and culture.
4) as for Mel...i cant help but think that some form the "order of Mel" emerged/emerges on any continent...in any time. The Buddha would be another i would consider "after the order of Mel."
On what do you base the notion that Abel was a hunter-gatherer? Gen. 4:2 states, "...And Abel was a keeper of flocks, but Cain was a tiller of the ground."
I too think He was the pre-incarnate Christ. . . like Bride said. . . .
"The writer of Hebrews clearly connotes that Christ is the one referred to in Psalms 110, Hebrews 5 and 7. So who is he? I think it was the pre-incarnate Christ in physical form. "
On what do you base the notion that Abel was a hunter-gatherer? Gen. 4:2 states, "...And Abel was a keeper of flocks, but Cain was a tiller of the ground."
wild guess, mostly
i guess hunter-gatherer overlaps with early nomadic herders
To seek and pursue and question and search the living can and will resurrect the dead that are alive for reconciliation in the heart of the universe of the spirit, the soul, the life of the one, the many, the all.
Enlightenment revives and sees that which is alive.
In this the thoughts of the ancients continue to live and activate.
Ready and willing to live in souls of men to open the eye and ear.
Recommended Posts
cman
might want to check your cain, cainan, caanan and more before a conclusion
there were more then one cainan-however it's spelled
one was the son of enos
one was the son of ham
one was the son of arphaxad
more i suspect...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrWearWord
This is what I don't understand. If the "sins are of the fathers blood” and Noah was from Abel's “bloodline” rather than Cain's seed, how could Noah's sons then be of the lineage of Cain?
Edited by DrWearWordLink to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Genesis 5 follows through to
Noah is from Seth, Adam's third son listed
not Cain of Cain and Abel
And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan
28And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
29And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
30And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:
31And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
32And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrWearWord
Ok, you have convincing evidence that Cainan was named after Cain but how does being Noe's son make him of the bloodline of Cain?
Until that quite simple question is answered, I must still conclude that if all life was destroyed in the flood except for Noe and his family... then the bloodline of Cain was severed.
So the only way Cain could have existed after the flood was if some were to pick up and revive his priestly order.
So in other words, the surviving Cain passed over the flood as “a spirit.” i.e. Melchisedec. Cain figuratively "walked on water" to survive after the flood through his priestly order.
Sons of Cain/bread and wine
Sons of man/flesh and blood.
Edited by DrWearWordLink to comment
Share on other sites
DrWearWord
It is an interesting note in the logic, that Abel's bloodline was also severed, Even if Abel had unrecorded offspring prior to his death they still would have been destroyed in the flood. It is interesting to reason that Abel's priestly order was "raised from the dead"... and re-instituted after his death, probably by Seth.
Thus neither order Cain/Abel had a literal bloodline after the flood.
Also, through Seth, two orders would be reborn into one.
One must then question why did God create two orders to oppose each other in the first place?
The heavens/and the earth, energy/matter, male/female, Adam/Eve, Cain/Abel, flesh/blood, bread/wine, liberty/law... Then the fathers/mothers of these orders become cursed and die and the surviving offspring, Seth (of neither Cain or Abel's bloodline), leads to eventually uniting both orders in a neutered body, soul and spirit, through Christ Jesus.
It seems if there is not rebirth involved God is not present, back to zero (zygote).
Zero creates one comprised of two, as intelligence creates learning; out of learning, wisdom and spirituality are fused and reborn...
Romans 10:9 KJV
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Comment:
To confess is to "say the same thing".
To take two orders, mouth/heart and merge them into one though the lord Jesus Christ/Christ Jesus.
The order of mouth/words/laws/knowledge/flesh and blood, and the order of the heart/faith/spirit/wine and bread.
The story leads me back to Cain and Abel... Two brothers, one who kills the other in a conflict of ego...
...In the story of the prodigal son, God seems to prefer the wayward son (order of faith), once dead to him, over the obedient son (order of law).
Ephesians 2:8 KJV
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Edited by DrWearWordLink to comment
Share on other sites
cman
I'll input that we are all of one blood.
And that to be destroyed or killed or die,
is not what it may seem to be.
Christ himself said he would destroy this temple and raise it up.
So for something to be destroyed, killed or die doesn't mean it's gone,
or annihilated forever.
I don't understand what you mean, or pointing out, by Noah being of the bloodline of Cain. Maybe I missed a comment or verse somewhere.
As for blood, you may recall that Abel's blood cried from the ground.
10And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
11And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand
Certainly more to see then what's on the surface, but it seems that 'blood' has some sort of life to it. Hoping to steer a bit away from the life of the flesh is in the blood and more toward life itself and the fact that it continues.
'Earth' seems quite significant as well as it is doing something here.
Which has me thinking about the flood covering the earth. Of which the flood has many different perspectives of what it actually was and what really happened.
I can even think of the Earth entering into a womb of a sort....concerning the flood - or covering even.
Edited by cmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
a few more things worth considering...
1) the judeo-christian account of the emergence of humanity (i.e. the book of Genesis in the modern Bible) most-likely has a very strong ethnocentric filter on it. In other words...it is NOT a tale of the whole planet-wide human race...although the writers at the time may have thought so. And there are other people's and cultures and histories that are OUTSIDE of the biblical geneological date-set. To avoid these in all theological consideration is to look at the history of man/God/religion through a very very tiny pinhole...and reduces the value of the Bible about the same amount.
2) i have often thought of the story of Cain and Abel as an early expression of the clash of Agrarian society versus Hunter-Gatherer society. The hunter-gathers (Abel) were "blessed by God at the time" because they honored what they killed and their lifestyle was generally sustainable and did not deforest the world. The agrarians (Cain) were not "blessed by God at the time" because their lifestyle generally caused desertification. Of course, this is a very broad generalization...because neither hunter-gather or agrarian are wholly good or evil.
But the general relationship patterns between the two societies certainly seems clear. The story of Cain and Abel is very much like the story of European Colonists and Native Americans. For some reason, the so-called civilized agrarian group mistakenly thinks the hunter-gatherers are "doing nothing with the land," and see no reason why they should be so blessed for being so "lazy."
And the native blood spilled all over the soil of this country never stops speaking. Much like revenge and grief for violence will keep hold of an entire nation for generations, keeping them angry and at war with each other. Call it karma, call it nature...but the blood of ALL injustice seeps back into our lives. Quite a curse. Millions of people building cities on top of bloody ground are never going to find rest or peace until there is some authentic atonement. "oh, that was hundreds of years ago" is like saying "i am not my brother's keeper." ...many are going to wish they had some of that "wisdom of the natives" when the systems come crashing down.
3) Offspring is not as much about bloodline...as it is about those who inherit a worldview, and lifestyle practices. Not merely my body, but also the shape of my worldview is passed on via language and culture.
4) as for Mel...i cant help but think that some form the "order of Mel" emerged/emerges on any continent...in any time. The Buddha would be another i would consider "after the order of Mel."
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
On what do you base the notion that Abel was a hunter-gatherer? Gen. 4:2 states, "...And Abel was a keeper of flocks, but Cain was a tiller of the ground."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Dot,
I too think He was the pre-incarnate Christ. . . like Bride said. . . .
"The writer of Hebrews clearly connotes that Christ is the one referred to in Psalms 110, Hebrews 5 and 7. So who is he? I think it was the pre-incarnate Christ in physical form. "
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
wild guess, mostly
i guess hunter-gatherer overlaps with early nomadic herders
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
To seek and pursue and question and search the living can and will resurrect the dead that are alive for reconciliation in the heart of the universe of the spirit, the soul, the life of the one, the many, the all.
Enlightenment revives and sees that which is alive.
In this the thoughts of the ancients continue to live and activate.
Ready and willing to live in souls of men to open the eye and ear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.