Are they all gods?

Below is a small sample on how names can be attributed to God yet no Jew thinks them to be God, unlike Christians who think calling jesus Lord or Emmanuel makes him God!. All those listed names of people and places will destroy that weak argument Christians make. There's also a list of who is speaking God or the author You decide.

There he set up an altar and called it El Elohe Israel. (Genesis 33:20)

Hebrew (אֱלֹהֵ֥י אֵ֖ל) the god, is the altar god?

Moses built an altar and called it The LORD is my Banner. (Exodus 17:15)

Hebrew ( נִסִּֽי׃ יְהוָ֥ה) yahwh is the banner Is god the banner of the alter?

So Gideon built an altar to the LORD there and called it The LORD Is Peace. To this day it stands in Ophrah of the Abiezrites. (Judges 6:24)

Hebrew (יְהוָ֥ה) yahwh Is the alter god??

There was a certain man from Ramathaim, a Zuphite from the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Elkanah son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. (1 Samuels 1:1)

Hebrew ( אֱלִיה֛וּא) ’ĕ-lî-hū  means my god is he!, Does that make Elihu a god?

Year after year this man went up from his town to worship and sacrifice to the LORD Almighty at Shiloh, where Hophni and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were priests of the LORD. (1 Samuel 1:3)

Hebrew ( עֵלִ֗י) Eli means my god Does that make Eli a god?

He went to his father's home in Ophrah and on one stone murdered his seventy brothers, the sons of Jerub-Baal. But Jotham, the youngest son of Jerub-Baal, escaped by hiding. (Judges 9:5)

Hebrew (יוֹתָ֧ם) yō-w-ṯām jotham means the perfect god Is jotham a perfect god??

Then the LORD said to Moses, "See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet. (Exodus 7:1)

Hebrew (אֱלֹהִ֑ים) Was Moses a god?

then his master must take him before the judges. He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.

(Exodus 21:6)

Hebrew (הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים) judges are referred as Elohim Are judges gods??

"The strong among the mighty ones shall speak of him and his helpers from the midst of Sheol, 'They have gone down, they lie still, the uncircumcised, slain by the sword.' (Ezekiel 32:21)

Hebrew (גִּבֹּרִֽיםאֵלֵ֧י  ) Were they all gods??

In the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, Hezekiah son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign. (2 kings 18:1)

Hebrew(חִזְקִיָּ֥ה) Hezekiah means mighty god Is Hezekiah a god?

But his bow remained steady, his strong arms stayed limber, because of the hand of the Mighty One of Jacob, because of the Shepherd, the Rock of Israel,(Genesis 49:24)

Is god the rock of isreal?

For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame." (1 Peter 2:6)

Is god a stone?

So this is what the Sovereign LORD says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who relies on it will never be stricken with panic. (Isaiah 28:16)

Is god a stone??

Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar, Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram, (Matthew 1:3)

Was ram the Hindu god his ancestor?

"A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more." (Matthew 2:18)

Hindu Rama??

And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already. (Exodus 1:5)

Out of his loins ?

If you dwell in this land, I will build you up and I will not pluck you up, for I have repented of the evil that I have done to you. (Jeremiah 42:10)

Does Yahweh repent ?

Jacob set up a stone pillar at the place where God had talked with him, and he poured out a drink offering on it; he also poured oil on it. (Genesis 35:14)

Jacob offering drink to a stone pillar?

 

And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? (Zachariah 3:2)

Was this Lord speaking of another Lord?

-----------------------------

Whos speaking?

Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven; (Genesis 19:24)

The Lord descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, (Exodus 34:5-7)

The LORD said to Satan, "The LORD rebuke you, Satan! The LORD, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you! Is not this man a burning stick snatched from the fire?" (Zachariah 3:2)

I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the Lord.( Amos 4:11)

But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the Lord their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen. (Hosea 1:7)

And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. (Exodus 3:12)

Then the LORD said to Moses, "Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel. You are to worship at a distance,(Exodus 24:1)

The LORD set a definite time, saying, "Tomorrow the LORD will do this thing in the land."So the LORD did this thing on the next day, and (Exodus 9:5-6)

How can you even think of taking this book seriously ?

The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend. Then Moses would return to the camp, but his young aide Joshua son of Nun did not leave the tent. (Exodus 33:11)

Whoever inserted the text saying that God spoke to Moses "face to face, as one speaks to a friend.  (Exodus 33:11) apparently failed to check that this was consistent with the main narrative, which at verse 20 has God saying to Moses "you cannot see my face

But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live." (Exodus 33:20)

---------------------

Christians may try to respond by saying “no that was a metaphorical statement it wasn't a literal Face to Face” but notice the proceeding statement “THEN Moses would return to the camp”. Moses would return to the camp, which means he would have met Yahweh in person like a friend does and have a chat and then get back to his camp. It’s  pretty clear this isn't a metaphorical statement, rather a  literal one.

This puts Christians into a dilemma, if Moses saw the Face of Yahweh why did Yahweh lie and say no man can see his face? If he didn't see Yahweh's Face why does the text say Moses would speak Face to Face like one speaks to his friend?  And please save yourselves from embarrassment by saying one can speak to his friend over the Phone without seeing him. There was No Phones 3000 years ago!!

It makes no sense, one moment Yahweh and Moses speak face to face, next moment Yahweh says to Moses he can’t see his face. unless the entire story was a lie made up by people who did not know what the proceeding verses were as the texts were being tampered and updated.

Yahweh could not preserve or protect his words/scriptures

Nowhere in the entire bible do we find God saying he is the author of the bible nor do we find God saying he will protect and preserve the bible. Now Christians often respond by quoting a certain verse from the bible, thinking this would support their bible from getting dismissed as unauthentic :

Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you. (Deuteronomy 4:2)

Thes also a similar statement found in the book of revelations slightly altered, Here's the problem with this verse notice how the author let's use the name Yahweh for now, is commanding "Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it". This is telling us that Yahweh is not saying he will Protect or Guard the Scriptures rather he's commanding the Jews not to change the the text??

There is no absolute guarantee that this commandment can be truly fulfilled knowing this task has been given to mortals who are bound to make mistakes and turn their ways. Satan can easily corrupt man and  changes have been made to the text and as we will see. Either Yahweh did not want his Scriptures to be preserved or he  simply was not able to just like he couldn't stop iron chariots!

If Yahweh thought mortals can preserve his words and scriptures then how does one explain Moses addressing his people telling them they will turn to corruption!.

For I know your rebellion and your stubbornness; behold, while I am still alive with you today, you have been rebellious against the LORD; how much more, then, after my death? Assemble before me all the elders of your tribes and all your officials, so that I can speak these words in their hearing and call the heavens and the earth to testify against them For I know that after my death you are sure to become utterly corrupt and to turn from the way I have commanded you. In days to come, disaster will fall on you because you will do evil in the sight of the LORD and arouse his anger by what your hands have made (Deuteronomy 31:27-29)

-----------------

Notice how Moses knew the attitudes of there rebellious people and predicted they will turn to corruption so he asked the leaders to place the Torah in the ark of Covenent for it will always be safe there, but even that has been gone the ark of the covenant it missing which means the original Torah is no longer with us.. So how does one verify what the Torah said during the time of Moses? The Jews are not trust worthy according to Moses,  even Yahweh  confess the Torah has been changed :

How can you say we are wise and have the Torah with us when the pen of the false scribes have changed it! (Jeremiah 8:8)

(A sample to this can be traced through different versions of Torah e.g )

And Nahor lived nine and seventy years, and begat Terah:

(Genesis 11:24 Samaritan Torah)

And Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah:

(Genesis 11:24 Masoretic Torah)

And Nachor lived a hundred and seventy-nine years, and begot Tharrha. 

(Genesis 11:24 Septuagint Torah)

--------------------

And when you have crossed the Jordan, set up these stones on Mount Ebal, as I command you today, and coat them with plaster.

(Deuteronomy 27:4 Masoretic text)

                                  Compare to

  

And when you have crossed the Jordan, set up these stones on MOUNT GERIZIM, as I command you today, and coat them with plaster.

(Deuteronomy 27:4 Samaritan text)

-----------------------------------------

He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers."

(Genesis 16:12 Masoretic text)

                                    Compare to

He will be a FRUITFUL MAN; his hand will be with everyone and everyone's hand will be with him, and he will live among all his brothers."

(Genesis 16:12 Samaritan text) 

-----------------------------------------

But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son's foreskin and touched Moses' feet with it. "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me," she said.

(Exodus 4:25 Masoretic Torah )

                                           Compare to

But seeboorah took a flint, and she CIRCUMCISED HER BLOCKED HEART and she brought herself to his feet and she said you are a bridegroom of blood to me,"

(Exodus 4:25 Samaritan Torah )

Below  we see Direct commandments have been added and subtracted 

"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."( Exodus 20:17 Masoretic Torah)

------------ Extended Version ---------------- Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, and not thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his field, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour's. And when it so happens that LORD God brings you to the land of Caanan, which you are coming to posses, you shall set-up there for you great stones and plaster them with plaster and you write on the stones all words of this law. And it becomes for you that across the Jordan you shall raise these stones, which I command you today, in mountain Grizim. And you build there the altar to the LORD God of you. Altar of stones. Not you shall wave on them iron. With whole stones you shall build the altar to LORD God of you. And you bring on it ascend offerings to LORD God of you, and you sacrifice peace offerings, and you eat there and you rejoice before the face of the LORD God of you. The mountain this is across the Jordan behind the way of the rising of the sun, in the land of Caanan who is dwelling in the desert before the Galgal, beside Alvin-Mara, before Sechem (Exodus 20:17 Samaritan Torah)

We can see from all those above versions, that Torah was not preserved as Christians claim. The original “13 scrolls” which was written by Moses is missing and no longer with us. Now if Christians believe all scriptures are God breathed and inspired then was Moses speaking the truth about Jews turning to Corruption! How about the Torah being distorted by false scribes, I'll leave that to you



---------------

Torah the Extended version!

After that, the people left Hazeroth and encamped in the Desert of Paran.

( Numbers 12:16 Masoretic Torah)

The above was the cut version below is the Extended version?

And afterward the people removed from Hazeroth, and pitched in the wilderness of Paran. And Moses is saying to sons of Israel: You came until the mountain of Amorites that LORD God gave to us. See you, LORD God gave you the land. Now rise and occupy so as spoken LORD God of your fathers to you. But they were afraid and they came to Moses and they said: we shall send mortals from us and they are spying out the land for us. And when they will return they will tell us which was we should ascend there and what cities we will pass upon. And this was good in the eyes of Moses. (Numbers 12:16 Samaritan Torah) 

forged books can't save you!

A while back I challenged Christians on the authenticity of their bible specially the gospels. The question that i asked them was :

How can you prove that the gospels you preach is 100% Authentic and Word of God? What Evidence do you have that the gospels are genuinely True and Jesus actually spoke all those words? 

In short I need you guys to prove and convince me the gospels are 100% word of God true to the very Text and that they are Truly Inspired !! I know Paul said all scriptures are Inspired but when Paul allegedly said that the gospels weren't written? He was referring to the Old Testament so don't try pulling that stunt...

--------------------------

Now this question was so heavy on Christians as their entire salvation is based on the teaching of Jesus as found in the gospels . Many decided to keep quiet and let the question go by as if they didn't see it, and others true do to insults.  But their were a few who tied to answer this by quoting 2 Timothy 3:16 which I made mention of during my question. Anyway since they've only got this one verse which they can use as their defence to prove the authenticity of the gospels.. Let's find out what really lies behind 2 Timothy 3:16.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, (2 Timothy 3:16)

Dr Erhman wrote on one of his blog and I quote :

"there letters that falsely claim to be written by Paul that are also *in* the New Testament?   Critical scholars (as opposed to fundamentalists and very conservative evangelical Christians) agree that there are.   Scholars normally place the thirteen Pauline letters of the New Testament into three categories:  The Pastoral Epistles of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, which are very widely recognized as having been written by someone other than Paul;"

Dr Ehrman also wrote, 

"But one point sometimes raised is that there is so much personal information in 2 Timothy, it is hard to see how it could be forged.  Why, for example, would a forger tell his alleged reader (who was not actually his reader!) to be sure to bring his cloak to him when he comes and also the books he left behind? 

"This objection has been convincingly answered by one of the great scholars of ancient forgery, Norbert Brox, who gives compelling evidence that this kind of "verisimilitude" (as I called it in Chapter 1) is typical for forgeries.  Making the letter sound "homey" removes the suspicion that it's forged.  The personal notices in 2 Timothy....serve, then, to convince readers that this really is written by Paul, even though it is not."

-----------------

Critical scholars are not in complete agreement over which books Paul actually wrote, but the “Pastoral Epistles” (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus) are often rejected as authentically Pauline. In fact, these were some of the first books attacked by the critics. In 1807, Friedrich Schleiermacher, known as the father of modern liberalism,10 wrote a letter in which he claimed 1 Timothy must have been penned in the second century AD, because some of the language seemed to be an effort to refute Gnosticism, a heresy that flourished in the second century. Other scholars expanded on this idea and rejected the other Pastorals for the following reasons: the vocabulary used in these books is quite distinct from his other letters, the books do not contain Paul’s typical theological themes, they don’t seem to fit the chronology of Paul’s activities in Acts, and the view of church governance is too advanced for the first century.

The first known attempt to canonize certain writings as authoritative scripture was undertaken by Marcion circa 140 A.D. His canon contained 10 Pauline epistles. He included all of the putative Pauline epistles in our canon (plus a couple extra). Notably absent, however, are 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus.

Similarly, Papyrus 46, a codex of Pauline epistles from about 200 A.D., although damaged, appears to have contained all of the letters traditionally attributed to Paul, except for the Pastorals

Tatian in the mid-second century accepted Titus, but rejected 1 & 2 Timothy.

So the only verse which Christians use to support the authenticity of the gospels is FORGED !! Which means there is no other way to prove the authenticity of the gospels, thus it cannot be taken as the inspired word of God.

How can you say we are wise when the Torah of the Lord has been corrupted by the scribes (Jeremiah 8:8)

Next time Christians please save yourself from the embarrassment of quoting 2 Timothy 3:16 as your evidence!

Reference 

https://ehrmanblog.org/pauline-forgeries-2-thessalonians-as-a-test-case/

1. 10 Ehrman praised Schleiermacher as “one of the most important Christian theologians of the nineteenth century [who] was famous for defending the Christian faith against its ‘cultured despisers’ and for developing distinct theological views that influenced theologians well into the twentieth century.” Ehrman, Forged, p. 95. From a conservative or evangelical viewpoint, Schleiermacher was definitely an important or influential theologian, but not for the right reasons. For example, he had “some serious problems: his experimental form of pantheism; his acceptance of Kantian epistemology; his disjunction of experience and doctrine; his contention that truth does not apply to religion; his reduction of theology to anthropology; and his acceptance of negative higher criticism of the Bible.” Geisler, Norman L. 1999. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, p. 689. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House.

Methods of ‘Wahy' on Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam)

Hadhrat Aisha (RA) narrates that one day a Sahâbi, Hadhrat Hârith bin Hisham (RA) asked Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam), how Wahy comes to him, Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) replied: "Sometimes it comes like ringing of a bell and this type of Wahy is toughest for me, and when this process ends, I remember whate­ver has been said. And sometime an angel comes to me in the form of a man". (Sahih Bukhari)

Salsalat-ul-Jaras (صلصلة الجرس )

It literally means the ringing of a bell. Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) compared this with the ringing of a bell. It was not because of the fact that it exactly resembled the ringing of bell, then, why was this comparison made? Great Ulema have given different explanations viz.,

i) To know the exact nature of ‘Wahy' is impossible for any body, its actual nature was only experienced by Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam). There were no words to explain its exact nature, that is why Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) explained it with most appropriate words from the sensual world and he (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) found it appropriate to compare it with the ringing of a bell.

ii) Some Ulema believe that it was the sound of the wings of the angels that produced the sound like that of a ringing bell. (Uloom -Ul-Qur'ân)

iii) Imâm-ul-Asr Hadhrat Allâmah Anwar Shah Kashmiri (RA) while quoting Ibn Arabi (RA) says that it was compared to the ringing of a bell, not because its sound resembled with it, but because it resembled the ringing bell in continuity and secondly as it is difficult to localise the direction of the sound of a ringing bell, so was it difficult to localise the direction of ‘Wahy'. Since, it is the word of Allâh, Who has no single direction, so is His word without any particular direction. (Faidhul Bâri)

Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) said that this type of Wahy was toughest for him and it was relatively easy for him when the angel used to come with ‘Wahy' in the form of a man. Hadhrat Aisha (RA) nar­rates: "I have witnessed descent of Wahy on Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) during very cold days of winter, after the completion of Wahy I used to see lot of sweating on the blessed forehead of Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam)." (Sahih Bukhari)

In other tradition it is mentioned that Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) used to turn pale, ashen grey in colour during descent of Wahy.

It is reported that once Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam), placed his blessed head on the thigh of Hadhrat Zayd bin Thâbit (RA) and descent of ‘Wahy' started during that very time, Hadhrat Zayd (RA) felt so much weight on his thigh that he thought it was going to crack.

Hadhrat Umar (RA) says that when ‘Wahy" used to come to Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam), there used to be sounds like those of buzzing of bees around his blessed face. This should not be confused with the earlier Hadith where ‘Wahy' has been compared with ringing of a bell, later (ringing of a bell) was experienced by Rasulullah (Sallallâhu Alaihi Wasallam) and former i.e., buzzing of bees was experienced by the listeners around, hence no confusion

-------------------------------------------

1- Ringing of the bells:

In Sahih Bukhari we have the statement of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) describing the phenomenon of revelation;

"Sometimes it is like the ringing of a bell, this form of Inspiration is the hardest of all and then this state passes ' off after I have retained what is inspired.” (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 2)

What is the significance of relating revelation to the idea of ringing of a bell? This is not mentioned in any Hadith but some scholars have given quite plausible explanations.

Shaykh Anwar Shah Kashmiri has quoted from Shaykh Ibn Arabi the most subtle explanation;

‘He states that the simile has been used in two respects;

a- Firstly it pertains to the continuity of the sound,

b- And secondly in so far as it is difficult to ascertain the direction of the sound of a bell continuously ringing as it appears to be coming from all directions, His words are heard from all directions. 

The exact perception of this state is not possible without actual observation but the Holy Prophet (PBUH) used the simile of ringing bells to bring it as near to the common understanding as possible,’ (An Approach to Qur’anic Sciences p.40 cf. Faidh Al-Bari 1/19-20)

Karen Armstrong makes a valid point when she says; “Revelation cannot be described in a simple manner.” (Muhammad Prophet of Our Time, p.49 pub. Harper Press 2006)

About this manner of revelation the Prophet (PBUH) said; “It is the hardest of all”. This was owing to the fact that there was no direct and common way of interaction but rather a super-human one. This is what made it the hardest of all the forms of revelation.

2- Angel coming in the human form:

Same Hadith also mentions, “Sometimes the Angel comes in the form of a man and talks to me and I retain whatever he says.”

In another Hadith about this form of revelation it is mentioned, the Prophet (PBUH) said;

“And this form is the easiest for me.” (Al-Ittiqan 1/50 cf. Sahih Abu Awana)

3- Analysis and Conclusion:

Comparison of these two forms of revelation supports the earlier explanation about the nature of revelation that physical concomitants of revelation were due to the communication with another –superhuman- world. The more unnatural the contact more extreme were the concomitants. If the angel came in the human form it was not an extraordinary burden on the Holy Prophet (PBUH). But if only the voice of the angel or directly the words of Allah were heard it was an extraordinary state and Holy Prophet (PBUH) had great burden upon him and faced trouble to grasp what was told.

Some refer to the Ahadith which say that “Bell is the instrument of Devil” and relating to the Ahadith in which Prophet (PBUH) said that at the time of revelation he listens to voice like ringing of the bell, they argue that it means the experience of revelation had Satan’s rule in it.

This is over simplification! We have in detail discussed the narration about revelation and sound like ringing of the bell. The very fact that Prophet (PBUH) termed the voice he heard LIKE the voice of ringing bells. The word ‘LIKE’ is significant which proves the absurdity of the parallel drawn between different Ahadith. Ringing of the bells is by no means so novel a phenomenon that Prophet (PBUH) would fail to describe it with certainty instead of making it just an object of simile.

Is Jesus of the bible the Son of Yahweh or Satan ? (This ones really going to hurt)

Christians love drumming into your ear that Jesus is the son of God. Christians have this pre programmed mentality that whatever you do don't forget to preach that Jesus is the son of God. Now this has always been the case when Muslims and Christians debate. A debate will not be complete until the son of God is not mentioned.

But the question is, was Jesus of the bible really the son of God? To answer this we have to go back to the beginning of the bible, the very first book Genesis and take it from there.

Nearly All Christians with an exception of a few (i.e handful) have an incorrect understanding of the story where Eve was tempted by the serpent. Unlike Jews Christians tend to use their own interpretation of the bible and that's how they get it wrong. The biblical account of the story where eve gets tempted by the serpent has a twist which Christians are unaware of. We all know that Adam and Eve were tempted into eating the fruit which took them out of the garden of Eden. What happened before them eating the fruit will shock you.

Now the serpent was cunning, more than all the beasts of the field that the Lord God had made, and it said to the woman, "Did God indeed say, 'You shall not eat of any of the trees of the garden?'" (Genesis 3:1)

Commentary

Now the serpent was cunning: What is the connection of this matter here? Scripture should have juxtaposed (below verse 21): “And He made for Adam and for his wife shirts of skin, and He dressed them.” But it teaches you as a result of what plan the serpent thrust himself upon them. He saw them naked and engaging in intercourse before everyone’s eyes, and he desired her. — [from Gen. Rabbah 18:6]

And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. (Genesis 3:13)

Focus on verse 13. The key word here is "beguiled" and for this we look into the Hebrew meaning. :

beguiled = Hebrew word # 5377 nasha' (naw-shaw');a primitive root; to lead astray, i.e. (mentally) to delude, or (morally) to seduce: to beguile, to deceive utterly (infinitive).

We find that this same idea is used in the New Testament Greek.

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:3)

serpent = Greek word # 3789 ophis (of'-is); probably from 3700 (through the idea of sharpness of vision); a snake, figuratively (as a type of sly cunning) an artful malicious person

beguiled = Greek word #1818 "exapatao" (ex-ap-at-ah'-o); To seduce wholly.

Bingo. Further confirmation that this was indeed a sexual act. There is only one single meaning of the Greek "exapatao" and it's quite clear.

not as Cain, who was of the evil one and slew his brother And for what reason did he slay him? Because his deeds were evil, and his brother's were righteous. (1 John 3:12)

The Greek expression translated "of the evil one" is ek poneros. The preposition ek denotes origin. It governs the genitive. The word poneros is clearly not referring to Adam or Adam's Creator. So, does this verse represent the kind of conclusive evidence we're seeking? If it does, it's not readily apparent. Due to the context of the verse, verse 8 even by itself seems to discount verse 12, declaring that "the one who practices sin is of the devil." (ek diabolos)

And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." (Genesis 3:15)

In reply Genesis 3:15 Yahweh says to Satan, "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed". The same word zehra was used for both the seed of Satan and the seed of Eve. Zehra literally means seed; there is no other meaning. It also could be used as grains of wheat but it is used throughout the Bible as meaning the descendants of a person. Satan was to have just as literal children in this world as Eve was to have. The same word zehra is used for Satan's seed and Eve's seed.

Just in case Christians bring up this verse from the bible to support that Cain was Adams son :

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. 2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. (Genesis 4:1-2)

Honestly, we can only say that one or more of them was Adam's, based strictly on this passage. there's a clue we should note before we move on. Upon delivering Cain, Eve declared that she had gotten a man with (Hebrew - 'eth) the Lord (Hebrew - Yehovah). If you research the name reference that is the Hebrew word Yehovah in all the surrounding context you find an interesting feature. Prior to Eve's declaration in Genesis 4:1 the word Yehovah is always followed by the word 'elohiym, forming "Lord God" - without exception. Eve's declaration marks a change. Why? Did she profane the name with reference to a lesser god? Well, that's something to think about.

Looking for way out of this wouldn't help Christians as the evidence provided above are sufficient to prove our point. Now that we've given hard evidence that Satan sexually deceived eve of the bible, let's introduce something else to this paper that will really tick Christians off.

According to the bible, the genealogy of Jesus has the bloodline of Cain who is the son of Satan. this would mean Jesus of the bible is from the line of Satan. Let's provide evidence from the very bible Christians claim is the absolute word of God.

the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of N of Nahor, the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech (Luke 3:34-36)

Did you catch the joke? Read the genealogy of Jesus carefully, amongst all the listed names we have one particular person named Cainan, the son of Arphaxad.

Cainan!!!! how did Cainan creep into the genealogy of Jesus?. If Cain was the father of Cainan then this would suggest that the bloodline of Satan came all the way down to Jesus which opens up a new can of worms.

More evidence from the bible suggest this to be true. Jesus of the bible could not have been the son of God as found in the book of Hebrews :

In the same way, Christ did not take on himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." (Hebrews 5:5)

Notice how Yahweh is saying today I have become your Father. why today if he always was his father? The same was said after Jesus was baptised in a variant reading codex bezae codex D. Why would Yahweh say to his son who was always with him today I have become your Father? This means he wasn't his son from the beginning, rather after he was baptized and cleansed he became his son is a metaphorical way not literal. Jesus was the son of satan and after being cleansed he became the son of Yahweh

This is another blow on Christians that their so called saviôur is actually from the bloodline of Satan