Talk:Serpent seed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

—The external link is, well, a little lacking in credibility. At the end, the author claims to write God's words, a communiqué to her. Is this external link worth keeping? --JH 28 June, 2005

This article needs citations for the people believing this doctrine, and quotes could be helpful. Would be interesting to know how far back the belief goes, and someone with an extensive knowledge of unusual Christian beliefs may be needed. I'd come across this belief before too, I'm going to try to hunt down the reference. Шизомби 21:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External link

I am removing the external link as it consists solely of non-verifiable information, parts of which could be viewed as anti-semitic.

I will try to add some details on what William Branham taught on the subject (which I am somewhat familiar with). I have no knowledge of some of the other manifestations of this belief, however, this should provide some material that could be added to in the future.

Taxee 16:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What did Eve eat?

Genesis 2:7 states that EVERY TREE in the garden was good to eat. Luke 21:29, Mark 8:24, Dan.4:10 and Prov.3:18 states that the word "tree" can be described as a nation, man, king and wisdom. Jer, 31:12 states the word garden does not necessarly mean a literal garden. It could symbolise the soul or the human body as in Songs of Solomon 4-8. The word eat could mean to partake as in Proverbs 30:20. The word "fruit" may be used literally or figuratively. For example read Deuteronomy 28:4; Psalm 127:3; Proverb18:20 and Luke 1:42. The bible was written in symbolism. It would be silly to think Yahweh would punish mankind for eating a piece of fruit. When you study the bible you must ask the holy spirit to guide you in the right path. Peace be unto all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.184.0.252 (talk • contribs) .

Why is it stupid to think that God would punish mankind for eating a piece of fruit? He told them not to eat of the tree, but they did. Biblically the word Sin means disobeying God, it doesn't matter what you're doing to disobey God; be it raping someone, be it eating a pice of fruit that God told you not to. The Biblical God does not see morality the way we see it, to Him disobediance of his commandments (and not just the ten commandments) or disobeying anything He tells us to do is sin. For Pete's sake, that's where the word sin originated, disobeying God. To you it's stupid, to God its sin. ManofRenown87 20:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

If the sin was eating a piece of fruit, why did God curse her in conception and not in eating? Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Gen 3:16 (ASV) Taxee 17:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

       Also, sin does not mean disobeying God, 

Sin is Unbelief in The Word of God. If you believe

that eating of a literal tree was the sin then you 

should read about the same tree of life in Revelations 22:2.

Adam sinned, eve was only ignorant.

Two things. First, both of them sinned, and I'm not going to form an argument about that because I think its you who are ignorant if you're going to overanalyze that any further. You don't want to throw scripture at me, you'll lose. So I'll save you the embarassment and just say that they both sinned. Second, why does it matter how God punished Eve for eating of the tree? How is that even relevant? They sinned, and god punished them both, end of story. Just because you don't understand the ways of God (and to be honest I can't truly understand them either, but I accept them) doesn't change the truth. Besides, you said: "literal tree... then you should read about the same tree of life in Revelations 22:2" but in Genesis Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Good and Evil, not the Tree of Life. So yes, the Tree of Life in Revelations can certainly be symbolic of something else, but you've got you're trees confused my friend, it is not the same tree described in Genesis. You screwed up. ManofRenown87 04:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] needs some NPOV / verification

For an article obviously written by partisans, the article actually reads OK, but more informed people should give it some attention. In particular, I'm wondering:

1. Is this William Branham person really as important to this subject as presented in the article?
2. Is the term "teachings" NPOV? It seems like an anachronsitic term used for rhetorical effect. If this is in line with other religin articles, I suppose this is fine.

--Apantomimehorse 08:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The followers of William Branham number well over 100,000 worldwide and this is one of their fundamental beliefs. As a result, they represent one of (if not the) major proponents of the doctrine. Taxee 17:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. In fact I believe the followers of William Branham number in the millions today, but this article does need input from someone with an in-depth knowledge of what other proponents of this doctrine have taught. This doctrine has been extant for many years, and certainly pre-dates William Branham. Malachi456 09:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)