I did!

I've studied this for a long time, and yet I am torn as to whether or not the Nachash in Genesis 3 is the same as Lucifer (Satan, The Adversary, who rebelled, etc.) who tempted Eve. Is it that Lucifer, HIMSELF, is a Nachash class of being or was it he, HIMSELF, who did the tempting/smooth-talking of Eve in the Garden, or is it that the Adversary/Lucifer/whatever "possessed" or somehow "coaxed" this "Serpent" (nachash) into tempting Eve. So, in essence, is it literally Satan who's doing the tempting, or is it a conspirator of Satan's who did the tempting FOR Satan? And if it's the latter, why would Lucifer do it that way, and not just do it himself? Your thoughts?

I got it in the mail today. I look forward to reading it

@@DerrickthePineconeRevelation 12 v 9.

@@MysteriousApocalypseMan like moses who burned acacai til the tent was full of smoke? oh yeah you guys follow jesus who says ignore the propehts and God

@@michael.1517 its in the torah, that thing christains like to twist

@@michael.1517 it was satire but matthew 11 14 contradicts malachai 4 5, and dumdums like you will google an answere different from the 20 questions not knowing i read the prophecies you ignore

@@michael.1517 Leviticus chapter 6. exodus 30:1 the verse to shorten it for the lazy minded now go cry about moses being a shaman and jesus a false messiah

@@michael.1517 i dont sppeak autisktktkttkktkt

InspiringPhilosophy Oh, Michael, such a coincidence that we follow the same channel. How are you going?

@@awhimoke3262 rabbi tovia singer is shit.

Moschiach & nachash the hebrew words contain a numeral value of 358, messiah & serpent from these hebrew words both mean the exact same thing in gematria, messiah also means christos, what do you think you been worshipping the entire time when you we're always getting defensive over the baal sun worship christian theology made by man over nothing? The creator & our savior never associated themselves to christianity for a reason because of how it symbolized baal, the sun & the serpent, historians & bible scholars have been lying to us about everything. You're no better than satan & the evil within him if you attempt to conceal the truth about original christianity's pagan roots. You can't win against the creator with satan's christian religion you think you can by lying to everyone but you can't, you can't conceal the truth from the world with darkness. He'll judge you for your actions when you leave this world Michael. False prophets will never enter into the kingdom of the creator.

Angels are part of the Unseen World which only God knows the secrets of...

The Serpent was not a snake. It was the Nachash, a Seraphim angel which was possessed by Lucifer who was a Cherubim. The Seraphs are upright walking and talking beings, not literal "snakes."

@@Rotisiv you can see angels...people in the bible did

Bizness? Anthony, can you expand please? Thank you sir, Christopher

@@christophersleight19 Business

@@christophecrist2171 hey Christophe forgive me, I wasn't doing a grammar police thing. In comments I sometimes miss meanings, Anthony may have just been given the Dr. H some props. My request for expanded thought was just me trying to find out if there was some slang I was unfamiliar with or some other meaning. I hope you understand it was not an attempt to start a throw down or just be a jerk. Thanks, greetings from the Midwest Christopher

The only thing holding the dust together is God, The Truth, in the soul. Add a bit of deception(ego) to the mix and the dust comes apart.

Insightful

Adam and Eve

caroline graystone You're reading between the lines! Back off with the wacky tobaccy and read Genesis 1 - 3 again.

Yes, the dust refers to man. Satan is a man, not the cherubim.

They do

I have plans to tackle that subject in queue. I think the evidence for the supernaturalist interpretation is overwhelming, especially after reading Amar Annus' paper. I also found Heiser's argument compelling in Unseen Realm.

See, I read both his books on the issue and I was thoroughly unconvinced it is referring to supernatural beings. I take John Walton's view that they are just human rulers. Heiser never addressed my specific objections to his view or the reasons I think nothing supernatural is happening in Genesis 6:1-4. I don't think we can thrust a supernatural interpretation onto this small text unless we read it through the lens of the book of Enoch, which I believe to be a much later attempt to re-interpret this small passage. I can't see any reason to interpret Nephilim to mean anything else than 'men or renown.'

It's been a couple years, and my recollection of the arguments are clouded, so I will have to reassess the literature if I do a video on it. Annus discovered uncatalogued Mesopotamian inscriptions that point-blank call the Apkallu "Watchers." This is significant because Daniel 4 refers to the heavenly Watchers as קדשין--a title for the heavenly sons of God in Israelite and Ugaritic religion. Since Genesis 6 is full of Mesopotamianisms, these inscriptions would seem to therefore give us direct cultural interface. I agree that those who interpret the Old Testament with Enoch are using poor methodology, however, I think there are good arguments that the *New Testament* authors make allusions to Enoch in manners that imply *they* took the same supernaturalist interpretation of Genesis 6. For example, the Greek word translated “hell” in II Peter 2:4 is not the expected Hades but the anomalous tartarus. Bremmer notes, “Virtually all passages in which the verb (kata)tartaroo occurs refers to Greek myths which have giants contained to chains in an event similar to the Watcher interpretation of Gen. 6,” and we know first century Jews were drawing that connection (E.g. Josephus Ant. 1.73) Jan N. Bremmer, “Remember the Titans,” in The Fall of the Angels, (Netherlands: Brill, 2004), 58. I'm anticipating, however, that these arguments are old news to you, so I offer them merely as examples of why I currently land where I do on the issue.

I think you need to bury your head in the sand to explain away the Jude reference.

I'm not dogmatic about Genesis 6. However I think that the Usage of the term 'sons of God' in Ugarit gives strong evidence that those in Genesis 6 and Deut 32 were divine.

Exactly, they look reptiloid

Answers in Genesis thinks that they are pterosaurs.

I've studied this for a long time, and yet I am torn as to whether or not the Nachash in Genesis 3 is the same as Lucifer (Satan, The Adversary, who rebelled, etc.) who tempted Eve. Is it that Lucifer, HIMSELF, is a Nachash class of being or was it he, HIMSELF, who did the tempting/smooth-talking of Eve in the Garden, or is it that the Adversary/Lucifer/whatever "possessed" or somehow "coaxed" this "Serpent" (nachash) into tempting Eve. So, in essence, is it literally Satan who's doing the tempting, or is it a conspirator of Satan's who did the tempting FOR Satan? And if it's the latter, why would Lucifer do it that way, and not just do it himself? Your thoughts?

I really dont think so.There is little similiarity between Ningishzida and Nachas aside from the fact that they are both serpentine and associated with earthen elements;their roles could not be more different.(Lord of the good tree in Ningishzida's case is more of the fact that he was associated with vegetation) It is more reasonable to infer that both near east cultures venerated serpents as divine or semi-divine beings

From what Ive studied... Adam prounouced Adom means mankind....

@luis garcia Elohim with a Capital E in Hebrew translates into "He that is the Power over powers". The Angels are alot Like us in we are both a creation from The Most High or Elohim. elohim small e, just means gods or powers. So angels played no part in creation. Also the word rib is actually more commonly translated as womb, and can even be translated in that verse as rib and womb, which is pretty amazing.

My Mom got a cat and just called it Kitten for a few years until one day she named it Fluff. Adam just called her Woman until Genesis 3:20 . . ." After this" Adam called his wife’s name Eve, "because" she had to become the mother of everyone living. . . seems to me, to be

Jesse Clinton God told the sixth day creation to be fruitful and multiply. That’s all the races. Seventh day God rests. Eighth day He makes Adam. Then , later Eve. He does not tell them to be fruitful. He tests them. If they would of passed the test, God would have overshadowed Eve with His Spirit and Christ would of come through her and then eventually go be the savior to the sixth day creation. But Eve had sex with Satan, for he wanted to taint the seed, knowing Christ was to come through the genealogy of Adam. So, Gods backup plan was to follow the seed of Adam ( the tribe of Judah) and when an obedient couple came, overshadow her.( Mary and Joseph) they both are from the tribe of Judah. Hope this helped. Reread Genesis one and two. Peace be with you

Jesse Clinton don’t take my word, reread it. He never tells Adam and Eve to procreate

kelebrity.

I think you mean the devil ?. There is a Lucifer, his name is Ea . Yet there is a Satan too. His name is Marduk. All of the Elohim are the devils !

Yes studying that one book really shows how much you don`t know about the subject ! Ken Harris !

Interesting, the symbol of Islam is also star and crescent moon. Any commonalities between Babylonian baal and Arab Islam?

@@emil_king8237 More commonalities are the Kaaba ! The Kaaba had 365 idols in it before Islam was founded by Muhammed. The last Idol in the Kaaba was Hubal. HU is a god from Egypt that personifies the spoken word. Then there is the Bal which is really Baal. Baal is Marduk Ra. Marduk may very well be Allah ! Although I have been told that title went to Nannar Suen !

benjamin bethel 👍🏼

Yes it was a growing nature in him... A dragon is simply a flying serpent..

@@Airdhem111 Evolved to hellish proportions.

And Gen 3:1 says "the serpent became cunning from all living (chay חית translated 'beasts') of the field made Yahweh God . . .." This excludes Satan from being the serpent because he was not a living being of the field made by Yahweh.

@@solitairecat1 Actually such a translation isn't inherent within the verse. InspiringPhilosphy actually has a video where he addresses this very objection: 1. Genesis 3A: The Serpent (Timestamp - 5 minutes 30 seconds) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bZiEZcWIncjPlnU.html

The Serpent was a Pharaoh... his mythological form was a wink at the Uraeus (rearing serpent) on the Pharaonic crown. Seraphim is an anagramn for Ph-r-s of Am(un). I believe that approximately translates to "The highest house of Amun". "House" = royal heiress

@@Highspergamy thanks