Teklemariam

[Sister Alvear]

I am not interested in talk about him just wanted to know how he differed in oneness doctrine from the UPC? Thanks

[Michael The Disciple]

Who is it?

[Sister Alvear]

Teklemariam...sorry...

[Praxeas]

I am not interested in talk about him just wanted to know how he differed in oneness doctrine from the UPC? Thanks
Heavenly Flesh

[ImThankful]

Divine Flesh Doctrine

[Sister Alvear]

so he believes there is no human side of Jesus?

[Praxeas]

so he believes there is no human side of Jesus?

They believe he derived his humanity solely from God. God created a human body and everything else that comes with it. He did not derive His humanity from Mary

[SRM]

I seen him preach live in the early 90's.Hard to believe He drifted towards a Divine flesh Jesus.In a sense,this is how Trinitarians believe anyway "God the Son" but they would not say that but in their description that is what they are saying bottom line,a walking deity!

[Praxeas]

Nothing close. Trinitarians do not believe the humanity of Christ was created humanity nor walking Deity. Christ, in Trinitarianism, has two distinct natures. Deity from God and Humanity from Mary

[Praxeas]

And Tek was Oneness so His "Son" was not a second person

[SRM]

Nothing close. Trinitarians do not believe the humanity of Christ was created humanity nor walking Deity. Christ, in Trinitarianism, has two distinct natures. Deity from God and Humanity from Mary

Sounds a lot like Oneness :)

[Praxeas]

Sounds a lot like Oneness :)
It's exactly like Oneness. Both Trinitarians and Oneness believe the Son is Deity and Humanity united together in the Person of Christ.

The difference is Trinitarians view the Son as a second Person

[Truthseeker]

so he believes there is no human side of Jesus?

Believes Jesus had real flesh just that was from no human origin. To some degree it had to be considering he had no human father.

[Praxeas]

UPCI position papers
http://www.spiritualabuse.org/issues/position/true_humanity.pdf

[canam]

Believes Jesus had real flesh just that was from no human origin. To some degree it had to be considering he had no human father.

Is the serpent seed doctrine and divine flesh doctrine the same thing ? Tekle from what ive been told was the type who always thought he got revelations that no one else got, all the way back to the beginning of his conversion to oneness, by bro and sis wendell (he was their first convert in ethiopia) i think he had believed this (by his revelation) for some time but no one ever said anything, until he wrote his book, then it all hit the fan.I think he is now supported by the trinitarians.Another brother has taken up the mantle, under much persecution and the oneness movement is flourshing under him from what ive heard.

[Sam]

This is from pages 3, 4, and 20 of the August 1990 Pentecostal Herald

Teklemariam Gezahagne is the
assistant superintendent of the
United Pentecostal Church in Ethiopia.
This article is an excerpt from
his book published by Word Aflame
Press, The Identity of Jesus Christ

Christ the Mediator between Man and God
by Teklemariam Gezahagne

Isaiah 59:16-17 is a prophecy
about the mediatorial work of
Christ as God incarnate: "And he
saw that there was no man, and
wondered that there was no intercessor:
therefore his arm brought
salvation unto him; and his righteousness,
it sustained him. For he
put on righteousness as a breastplate,
and an helmet of salvation
upon his head; and he put on the
garments of vengeance for clothing,
and was clad with zeal as a
cloke."

The arm of God means the power
of God, and every Christian knows
that Jesus Christ is the power and
wisdom of God (I Corinthians 1:24).

Because of the transgression of
Adam and Eve, sin abounded on
the earth. Thus there was an urgent
need for a power that would be able
to take away eternal death-the
wages of sin-and give to humanity
eternal life instead. The power of
sin separated people far from God.
There stood a veil between God and
humanity as a result, and no earthly
power could take away the veil
and reconcile humanity to God.
Since human righteousness was as
"filthy rags," there was no human
worthy to reconcile mankind to
God. Therefore, God's own arm
brought reconciliation between
humanity and God. The arm of God
was God Himself coming in the flesh.

Isaiah spoke of this mediator in
Isaiah 53:l-6: "Who hath believed
our report? and to whom is the arm
of the LORD revealed? For he shall
grow up before him as a tender
plant, and as a root out of a dry
ground: he hath no form nor comeliness;
and when we shall see him,
there is no beauty that we should
desire him. He is despised and rejected
of men; a man of sorrows,
and acquainted with grief: and we
hid as it were our faces from him:
he was despised, and we esteemed
him not. Surely, he hath borne our
griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet
we did esteem him stricken, smitten
of God, and afflicted. But he
was wounded for our transgressions,
he was bruised for our iniquities:
the chastisement of our
peace was upon him; and with his
stripes we are healed. All we like
sheep have gone astray; we have
turned every one to his own way;
and the LORD hath laid on him the
iniquity of us all."

In another place the same prophet
revealed that this mediator
would be God incarnate: "For unto
us a child is born, unto us a son is
given: and the government shall be
upon his shoulder: and his name
shall be called Wonderful, Counselor,
The mighty God, The everlasting
Father, The Prince of Peace"
(lsaiah 9:6). The title "Prince of
Peace" discloses that He came to
the world to make peace between
God and humanity as a mediator.
Since He is the Son of God, He is
able and has power to reconcile us
to God. As the Bible declares, "Behold
my servant, whom I have
chosen; my beloved, in whom my
soul is well pleased: I will put my
spirit upon him, and he shall shew
judgment to the Gentiles. He shall
not strive, nor cry; neither shall
any man hear his voice in the
streets. A bruised reed shall he not
break, and smoking flax shall he
not quench, till he send forth judgment
unto victory. And in his name
shall the Gentiles trust" (Matthew
12:18-21). Through His atoning
death, He makes intercession unto
salvation: "Wherefore he is able
also to save them to the uttermost
that come unto God by him, seeing
he ever liveth to make intercession
for them" (Hebrews 7:25).

The Old Testament priests were
sinful men and daily needed to offer
up sacrifices, first for their own
sins and then for the people's. Their
priesthood was only temporary because
of sin and death. But the New
Testament high priest-Jesus Christ
-was sinless, holy, and separate
from sinners. He did not need to offer
up sacrifices for any sins of His
own. Rather, He offered himself up
once and for all so that sinners can
be cleansed by His blood and can
come to God through His priesthood.
Christ's priesthood was established
eternally with an oath,
for He is without sin, eternal, and
unchangeable.

Through Christ's sacrifice we can
receive forgiveness of sins. "My little
children, these things write I unto you,
that ye sin not. And if any
man sin, we have an advocate with
the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
and he is the propitiation for
our sins: and not for ours only, but
also for the sins of the whole world"
(1 John 2:l-2). Indeed, everyone
who makes the Son of God His advocate
has eternal life. But those
who do not have the Son of God do
not have God the Father either, and
so do not have eternal life (I John
512-13).

Believers are united into one
body, the church, by the redemptive
work of Jesus Christ. "For he
is our peace, who hath made both
one, and hath broken down the
middle wall of partition between
us; having abolished in his flesh
the enmity, even the law of commandments
contained in ordinances;
for to make in himself of
twain one new man, so making
peace: and that he might reconcile
both unto God in one body by the
cross, having slain the enmity
thereby: and came and preached
peace to you which were afar off,
and to them that were nigh. For
through him we both have access
by one Spirit unto the Father. Now
therefore ye are no more strangers
and foreigners, but fellow citizens
with the saints, and of the household
of God" (Ephesians 2:14-19).
Because of the mediation of His only
begotten Son, we have access to
the Father.

The mediation of Jesus Christ
should not be taken lightly; we
were so sin-stained and separated
from God that there could never be
any reconciling power except by a
sinless man who proceeded from
God-Jesus Christ, the only begotten,
n Son of God. "As by one man sin
entered into the world, and death
by sin; and so death passed upon
all men, for that all have sinned
. . . .And not as it was by one that
sinned. so is the gift: for the judgment
was by one to condemnation,
but the free gift is of many offenses
unto justification. For if by one
man's offense death reigned by
one; much more they which receive
abundance of grace and of the gift
of righteousness shall reign in life
by one, Jesus Christ" (Romans
5:12, 16-17).

When we fully understand the holiness
of Christ and that he partakes
of the nature of the Father, we feel
confident that His blood blots out
our sins and we fearlessly come into
the presence of the Father. Thus
we become a new creation after the
likeness of His Son. "Therefore if
any man be in Christ, he is a new
creature: old things are passed
away; behold, all things are become
new. And all things are of
God, who hath reconciled us to
himself by Jesus Christ, and hath
given to us the ministry of reconciliation:
to wit, that God was in
Christ, reconciling the world unto
himself, not imputing their trespasses
unto them; and hath committed
unto us the word of reconciliation"
(11 Corinthians 5:17-19).
å
Those of us who are baptized in
Jesus' name and filled with the Holy
Ghost have put on Christ and
have been regenerated. (See John
35; I Corinthians 12:13; Galatians
3:27.) Thus we have no condemnation
(Romans 8:l). "Who shall lay
any thing t o t h e charge of God's
elect? I t is God that justifieth. Who
is he that condemneth? I t is Christ
that died, yea rather, that is risen
again, who is even at the right
hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us" (Romans
8:33-34).

The redemptive work of Jesus
Christ in this world for us-His sufferings,
humiliation, poverty,
agony, lamentations, pains, and
shedding of His precious blood,
culminating in His death, burial,
resurrection, and ascension-has
made salvation and eternal life
available to all humanity.

[Truthseeker]

Is the serpent seed doctrine and divine flesh doctrine the same thing ? Tekle from what ive been told was the type who always thought he got revelations that no one else got, all the way back to the beginning of his conversion to oneness, by bro and sis wendell (he was their first convert in ethiopia) i think he had believed this (by his revelation) for some time but no one ever said anything, until he wrote his book, then it all hit the fan.I think he is now supported by the trinitarians.Another brother has taken up the mantle, under much persecution and the oneness movement is flourshing under him from what ive heard.

Don't know about the serpent seed thing, never heard anything about. I have spoke with on the phone before regardng the flesh of Jesus. One thing for sure with stuff like this is stuff gets misconstrued when we start going by "I heard"

[Ferd]

Is the serpent seed doctrine and divine flesh doctrine the same thing ? Tekle from what ive been told was the type who always thought he got revelations that no one else got, all the way back to the beginning of his conversion to oneness, by bro and sis wendell (he was their first convert in ethiopia) i think he had believed this (by his revelation) for some time but no one ever said anything, until he wrote his book, then it all hit the fan.I think he is now supported by the trinitarians.Another brother has taken up the mantle, under much persecution and the oneness movement is flourshing under him from what ive heard.

the two are very different.

Serpent Seed doctrine is the heresy that states Cain was born of a sexual relationship between Eve and the Serpent that tempted her in Gen. 3.

Divine Flesh teaches that Jesus had no DNA connection to Mary.


It should be noted that DF is very much part of the Ethiopan Coptic church. it was no Revalation to Tek. It was cultural ancient teaching.

[canam]

Ah thanks Ferd, i didnt know that about the coptic's.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Maybe this might help.
http://www.preachingpoints.com/2008/12/divine-flesh-doctrine-heresy/

[mfblume]

the two are very different.

Serpent Seed doctrine is the heresy that states Cain was born of a sexual relationship between Eve and the Serpent that tempted her in Gen. 3.

Divine Flesh teaches that Jesus had no DNA connection to Mary.


It should be noted that DF is very much part of the Ethiopan Coptic church. it was no Revalation to Tek. It was cultural ancient teaching.
Right. Churches all around him in Ethiopia believe that. Bro Tekl. never got away from that "coptic orthodox" teaching.

[Sam]

Right. Churches all around him in Ethiopia believe that. Bro Tekl. never got away from that "coptic orthodox" teaching.

Well, we all are shaped by our environment.
Look at the different doctrines we've brought into the Apostolic Faith from where we came from.

[Praxeas]

So who ex-communicated who?

[Sam]

So who ex-communicated who?

Like two kids on the playground throwing tantrums they each said, "I don't want to play with you no more."

[pelathais]

Is the serpent seed doctrine and divine flesh doctrine the same thing ? Tekle from what ive been told was the type who always thought he got revelations that no one else got, all the way back to the beginning of his conversion to oneness, by bro and sis wendell (he was their first convert in ethiopia) i think he had believed this (by his revelation) for some time but no one ever said anything, until he wrote his book, then it all hit the fan.I think he is now supported by the trinitarians.Another brother has taken up the mantle, under much persecution and the oneness movement is flourshing under him from what ive heard.

No, not really. "Serpent Seed" deals with the parentage (alleged parentage) of much of the human race. "Divine Flesh" deals with the question of where the human body of Jesus Christ (and only Jesus Christ) had come from.

"Divine Flesh" arises from the ancient Gnostic religions which were incorporated into a great deal of early Christianity. The "bad god" was "Jehovah" who had created this evil world filled with pain and woe. The "good god" was Jesus Christ who only appeared to have had a real human body (in Gnosticism). Since most of the Gnostic literature that survived from antiquity survived in the Ethiopian Coptic language (until the Nag Hammadi discovery) it's probably no surprise that the Ethiopians have been influenced by its legacy.

"Divine Flesh" simply adds a "divine human body" to the old Gnostic equation, but it seems to follow many other Gnostic themes in handling the Person of Jesus Christ. They have also dropped the dualism ("Jehovah is the bad god") that was carried on by other groups like the Bogomils and Cathari.

[Truthseeker]

Had to be some divine indluence in the creation of the flesh considering he had no human father.

Not one "divine flesh" propenent will deny he had a real physical fleshly body, not just appeared to have one.

[pelathais]

Had to be some divine indluence in the creation of the flesh considering he had no human father.

Not one "divine flesh" propenent will deny he had a real physical fleshly body, not just appeared to have one.

Parthenogenesis ("virgin" birth) occurs all the time in nature. Female sharks in aquariums are kept isolated from males to control the shark population but they will sometimes "spontaneously" become pregnant and give birth.

The occurrence of this phenomena in mammals has never been documented, that I am aware of, so if it did occur it would be so astronomically unlikely that it would be considered miraculous.

The mechanism is already in place and actually working in "lower" animals and we don't need "divine" explanations for why several shark pups appeared overnight at the public aquarium. Thus, we don't really need a "divine" explanation for the human flesh of Jesus Christ - just an explanation for its miraculous and unlikely appearance in history; and we've got that (Matthew 1:20).

[Steven Avery]

Parthenogenesis ("virgin" birth) occurs all the time in nature. Female sharks in aquariums are kept isolated from males to control the shark population but they will sometimes "spontaneously" become pregnant and give birth.

The occurrence of this phenomena in mammals has never been documented, that I am aware of, so if it did occur it would be so astronomically unlikely that it would be considered miraculous Arthur Custance:

The Virgin Birth and the Incarnation
https://custance.org/Library/Volume5/Part_IV/Introduction.html

No light is shed on the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus Christ by pointing to known cases of animal parthenogenesis induced by special techniques, because in mammals such offspring are always females and never males. The virgin birth of a male child is unaccountable, is in fact theoretically impossible. It must therefore have been a miracle.

[CC1]

the two are very different.

Serpent Seed doctrine is the heresy that states Cain was born of a sexual relationship between Eve and the Serpent that tempted her in Gen. 3.

Divine Flesh teaches that Jesus had no DNA connection to Mary.


It should be noted that DF is very much part of the Ethiopan Coptic church. it was no Revalation to Tek. It was cultural ancient teaching.

Speaking of which there is a Oneness Pentecostal serpent seed doctrine church just 5 minutes from my house down the highway I live off of. Apparently the church started in California and forty or so years ago the pastor had a revelation that CA was about to fall off into the Pacific Ocean so moved his church and as many of the congregation as who would to Middle Tennessee. Base on the number of cars there on a Sunday I am guessing they run about 100-125 folks.

[Birddog]

Speaking of which there is a Oneness Pentecostal serpent seed doctrine church just 5 minutes from my house down the highway I live off of. Apparently the church started in California and forty or so years ago the pastor had a revelation that CA was about to fall off into the Pacific Ocean so moved his church and as many of the congregation as who would to Middle Tennessee. Base on the number of cars there on a Sunday I am guessing they run about 100-125 folks.

Error begets error.

[consapente89]

It would astound us the number of Oneness churches that teach a version of serpent seed.

[Sister Alvear]

Over the years I have known a lot of Branhamites....they may even come out of that group but it seldom comes out of them...

[Jito463]

It would astound us the number of Oneness churches that teach a version of serpent seed.

Funny how I've been in Oneness Pentecostalism my whole life (over 4 decades), and this thread is the first time I've even heard of it.

[1 God]

It would astound us the number of Oneness churches that teach a version of serpent seed.
Poisoned by extra Biblical ideas.

[consapente89]

Funny how I've been in Oneness Pentecostalism my whole life (over 4 decades), and this thread is the first time I've even heard of it.

You may not have recognized it.

[returnman]

Over the years I have known a lot of Branhamites....they may even come out of that group but it seldom comes out of them...

There is a small group of Branhamites here locally. One family we are acquainted with that has a statue of an eagle in their front yard that supposedly signifies association with such.

[aegsm76]

Speaking of which there is a Oneness Pentecostal serpent seed doctrine church just 5 minutes from my house down the highway I live off of. Apparently the church started in California and forty or so years ago the pastor had a revelation that CA was about to fall off into the Pacific Ocean so moved his church and as many of the congregation as who would to Middle Tennessee. Base on the number of cars there on a Sunday I am guessing they run about 100-125 folks.

There is a church in the Atlanta area with the exact same story. For a while, we fellowshipped with them (when we were in Atlanta).
Never knew they were serpent seed, however.
If I remember correctly, part of the church that moved went to Tennessee and part to Atlanta.

[Jito463]

You may not have recognized it.

:spit

Not recognized someone claiming Cain was the child of the serpent? BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, this I've got to hear. Please, pray tell how this might have mysteriously been "slipped in" on me unawares. Don't worry, I'll wait.

[consapente89]

:spit

Not recognized someone claiming Cain was the child of the serpent? BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, this I've got to hear. Please, pray tell how this might have mysteriously been "slipped in" on me unawares. Don't worry, I'll wait.

Those that I'm referring to do not teach that Cain was the child of the serpent, but have rather strange teaching's, akin to serpent seed regarding nephilim.

[diakonos]

Funny how I've been in Oneness Pentecostalism my whole life (over 4 decades), and this thread is the first time I've even heard of it.

The first you heard of serpent seed?

[Pressing-On]

Funny how I've been in Oneness Pentecostalism my whole life (over 4 decades), and this thread is the first time I've even heard of it.

The Serpent Seed Doctrine Examined

https://onenesspentecostal.com/serpentseed.htm

[Jito463]

Those that I'm referring to do not teach that Cain was the child of the serpent, but have rather strange teaching's, akin to serpent seed regarding nephilim.

Wait, which is it? Does the "serpent seed" teach that Cain was born from the joining of Eve and the serpent, or doesn't it? You're confusing me, man.

Or maybe you're the confused one. Yeah, I'm gonna go with that.

The first you heard of serpent seed?

Yes, this is a new one to me. Then again, there's a lot of false doctrines out there, and I don't have time to keep up with all of them.

The Serpent Seed Doctrine Examined

https://onenesspentecostal.com/serpentseed.htm

Thanks, I'll take a look later. I'm curious where people come up with this insane nonsense.

[consapente89]

Wait, which is it? Does the "serpent seed" teach that Cain was born from the joining of Eve and the serpent, or doesn't it? You're confusing me, man.

Or maybe you're the confused one. Yeah, I'm gonna go with that.



Yes, this is a new one to me. Then again, there's a lot of false doctrines out there, and I don't have time to keep up with all of them.



Thanks, I'll take a look later. I'm curious where people come up with this insane nonsense.

You've never heard of serpent seed until now, but you're well enough acquainted to determine that I am confused about it? Okay...:thumbsup

I'm well aware of what serpent seed as taught by Branham, Murray and others means. Also, well aware of what some more prominent Pentecostals are teaching, that is at the very least, the twin sister of serpent seed.

[Jito463]

You've never heard of serpent seed until now, but you're well enough acquainted to determine that I am confused about it? Okay...:thumbsup

I'm well aware of what serpent seed as taught by Branham, Murray and others means. Also, well aware of what some more prominent Pentecostals are teaching, that is at the very least, the twin sister of serpent seed.

So now it's not "serpent seed" being taught, it's the "twin sister" of serpent seed? What does that even mean?

I'm basing my understanding of the doctrine off this thread, so based on what's been posted here, I can guarantee that no one I've ever heard has espoused such a doctrine. Yet you come along and claim I've heard it, but don't realize it. You haven't posted anything here to convince me that could possibly be true.

[TJJJ]

I see the error of serpent seed doctrine to be that demons had the ability to have sexual relations with humans. This is error that then expands out to the sons of God sons of men doctrine. Both are in error.

There are even some prominent men in the upc and wpf that teach sons of God sons of men doctrine.

This false doctrine is similar to the error for the incubus and succubis witchcraft doctrine. It is gross error but tenaciously held onto by some in the ranks of pentecost.

The serpent seed doctrine also tries to establishes two seeds, the seed of God and the seed of satan, that then goes all the way down through time.

When we study the two lineages though, we see that the two lines are actually the sons of Seth, (Sons of God) and the sons of Cain (Children of Men). No demons involved in their creation just two lines of humanity following different spirits.

[diakonos]

Sons of God sons of men doctrine?

[Jito463]

I see the error of serpent seed doctrine to be that demons had the ability to have sexual relations with humans.

Okay, now this I do vaguely remember someone mentioned once, in an offhand manner. I recall thinking that was rather odd, but it was quickly passed over and never brought up again. If this is what consapente89 was referring to, he could have just stated as such and we could have had a more rational discussion; instead of just claiming I'd heard it, but didn't realize it, without explaining what I was supposed to have heard.

That said, I've only heard it mentioned once, and never by anyone who took it seriously.

This is error that then expands out to the sons of God sons of men doctrine. Both are in error.

There are even some prominent men in the upc and wpf that teach sons of God sons of men doctrine.

This false doctrine is similar to the error for the incubus and succubis witchcraft doctrine. It is gross error but tenaciously held onto by some in the ranks of pentecost.

The serpent seed doctrine also tries to establishes two seeds, the seed of God and the seed of satan, that then goes all the way down through time.

When we study the two lineages though, we see that the two lines are actually the sons of Seth, (Sons of God) and the sons of Cain (Children of Men). No demons involved in their creation just two lines of humanity following different spirits.

The rest of this, like the SS doctrine mentioned previously, I've never heard a single preacher espouse.

[jediwill83]

Okay, now this I do vaguely remember someone mentioned once, in an offhand manner. I recall thinking that was rather odd, but it was quickly passed over and never brought up again. If this is what consapente89 was referring to, he could have just stated as such and we could have had a more rational discussion; instead of just claiming I'd heard it, but didn't realize it, without explaining what I was supposed to have heard.

That said, I've only heard it mentioned once, and never by anyone who took it seriously.



The rest of this, like the SS doctrine mentioned previously, I've never heard a single preacher espouse.




Ive heard it when I was younger. The whole, "Sons of God saw the daughters of men yadda yadda yadda and there were giants in the land."


Didnt realize that was that was. Yall are saying that its actually referencing the descendants of Cain and Abel?

[diakonos]

Ive heard it when I was younger. The whole, "Sons of God saw the daughters of men yadda yadda yadda and there were giants in the land."


Didnt realize that was that was. Yall are saying that its actually referencing the descendants of Cain and Abel?

Oh, that. I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that the sons of God is referring to the descendants of Seth.

[jediwill83]

Oh, that. I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that the sons of God is referring to the descendants of Seth.




Bro. Im no expert so Im not even qualified to call you out on it even if you WERE wrong lol plus Im exhausted. Packed up a 26 foot uhaul for my friend and we are FINALLY done. Gonna drop it at the storage place tomorrow and thats gonna go quick because Ive been away from my wife and kid way too long.

[consapente89]

So now it's not "serpent seed" being taught, it's the "twin sister" of serpent seed? What does that even mean?

I'm basing my understanding of the doctrine off this thread, so based on what's been posted here, I can guarantee that no one I've ever heard has espoused such a doctrine. Yet you come along and claim I've heard it, but don't realize it. You haven't posted anything here to convince me that could possibly be true.

You’re great at twisting words. This will be my last response. If you have never heard the serpent seed or similar doctrines espoused in your 40 years of Pentecost, that’s wonderful. I am not trying to convince you that you have. I merely suggested the potential that you had heard it without recognizing what it was. That does happen, it happened to me. If indeed you haven’t, that is wonderful!

[consapente89]

I see the error of serpent seed doctrine to be that demons had the ability to have sexual relations with humans. This is error that then expands out to the sons of God sons of men doctrine. Both are in error.

There are even some prominent men in the upc and wpf that teach sons of God sons of men doctrine.

This false doctrine is similar to the error for the incubus and succubis witchcraft doctrine. It is gross error but tenaciously held onto by some in the ranks of pentecost.

The serpent seed doctrine also tries to establishes two seeds, the seed of God and the seed of satan, that then goes all the way down through time.

When we study the two lineages though, we see that the two lines are actually the sons of Seth, (Sons of God) and the sons of Cain (Children of Men). No demons involved in their creation just two lines of humanity following different spirits.

Thank you!

[consapente89]

Ive heard it when I was younger. The whole, "Sons of God saw the daughters of men yadda yadda yadda and there were giants in the land."


Didnt realize that was that was. Yall are saying that its actually referencing the descendants of Cain and Abel?

Most who believe the former may not believe the latter, but it is the same error, and more prominent.

[TJJJ]

The Sons of God originally were the sons of Seth, or the righteous seed.

We see this phrase sons of God used for the righteous, even in Job...

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Everybody tries to make this some sort of heavenly gathering of angels and satan, but at this time satan had been cast down to the earth. I see, according to the fulfillment in the New Covenant, that this was just righteous people having what we would call church. They were having a gathering together, as we do, and satan also was there. But it was on this earth and the sons of God were humans following the direction of God. It is possible and probable that Job himself was there and that is why the Lord God asked satan, have you considered this man Job? Job was just going about his normal church business sacrifices and etc and in the spiritual dimension there was a discussion going on about him.

We can see the same sons of God terminology then that coming into the New Covenant in John 1.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Rom 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Php 2:14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:
Php 2:15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

1Jn 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
1Jn 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

The sons of God just refer to righteous people following the will of God for we see that again, this is referring to those of the righteous, not angels.

In opposite we see the sons of men referring to those who walk after the flesh and in doing so become the sons of men. Yet Jesus told them they were after their father the devil.

Joh 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Was the devil really the one who had fathered them? Obviously not, but because they obeyed him Jesus called them children of the devil.

Again, not angels having relationship with humans, nor demons having relationships with human, but the fatherhood of both is determined by who they obey.

[TJJJ]

Thank you!

:thumbsup

I know that some prominent men in both orgs believe or did believe the other but it is wrong.

[Esaias]

The serpent seed doctrine (that the serpent was a humanoid being who seduced Eve and got her pregnant, producing Cain) originates in the Babylonian Talmud.. It's a Jewish myth.

The sons of God are actually the descendants of Adam (most likely through Seth), while the "daughters of men" were others (likely Cainites). The history is one of intermarriages between the royal lineage of Seth's various descendants and others, resulting in a degradation of culture - including religion. The worship of God was corrupted and forgotten, giving rise to paganism.

As is so often the case among idiot pagans (paganism produces stupidity, see Romans ch 1) the famous ancestors become mythologised into gods and demigods. Thus the recurring pagan traditions of the Golden Age or Time of Legends in which "the gods" intermarried with humans producing demigods or famous men of reknown.

The truth is, the descendants of the royal Sethites intermarried with others and those offspring installed themselves as tyrants and conquerors claiming divine ancestry (and thus claiming a "divine right to rule"). This is the origin of the myth of "god-kings", rulers claiming descent from divine beings and thus superior to others and possessing an inherent right and duty to manage everybody else's destiny. (Sound familiar?) It is a corruption of the original role of God's sons in the earth - to manage the planet just as Adam originally managed the Garden.

[1 God]

The Sons of God originally were the sons of Seth, or the righteous seed.

We see this phrase sons of God used for the righteous, even in Job...

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Everybody tries to make this some sort of heavenly gathering of angels and satan, but at this time satan had been cast down to the earth. I see, according to the fulfillment in the New Covenant, that this was just righteous people having what we would call church. They were having a gathering together, as we do, and satan also was there. But it was on this earth and the sons of God were humans following the direction of God. It is possible and probable that Job himself was there and that is why the Lord God asked satan, have you considered this man Job? Job was just going about his normal church business sacrifices and etc and in the spiritual dimension there was a discussion going on about him.

We can see the same sons of God terminology then that coming into the New Covenant in John 1.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Rom 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Php 2:14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:
Php 2:15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

1Jn 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
1Jn 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

The sons of God just refer to righteous people following the will of God for we see that again, this is referring to those of the righteous, not angels.

In opposite we see the sons of men referring to those who walk after the flesh and in doing so become the sons of men. Yet Jesus told them they were after their father the devil.

Joh 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Was the devil really the one who had fathered them? Obviously not, but because they obeyed him Jesus called them children of the devil.

Again, not angels having relationship with humans, nor demons having relationships with human, but the fatherhood of both is determined by who they obey.

:thumbsup

[TJJJ]

The sons of God are actually the descendants of Adam (most likely through Seth), while the "daughters of men" were others (likely Cainites).



Not trying to get into a big debate but does this view tend to go along with an idea that there were other inhabitants who were just outside the garden?

I know some men that believe that, they call it old earth doctrine.

[Esaias]

Not trying to get into a big debate but does this view tend to go along with an idea that there were other inhabitants who were just outside the garden?

I know some men that believe that, they call it old earth doctrine.

There are two views you are asking about:

1. PreAdamites (people created prior to Adam and Eve).

2. Sons of God = Adamites and/or Sethites.

Some who hold to number 1 may hold to number 2, while some may not. Some who hold to number 2 may hold to number 1 while others may not.

Ex: Arnold Murray and the Shephard's Chapel group held to number 1, but also believe serpent seed doctrine. I do not know if he/they believe the Sons of God were humans, or fallen angels.

Many old earth creationists believe in preadamites, but maintain they were wiped out in Gen 1:2. Many of them believe Sons of God were Sethites, but many others believe they were fallen angels.

There are young earth believers who believe both 1 and 2 above, but others who believe one or the other but not both.

I think they are two distinct beliefs, they aren't dependant on one another. Although many who believe 1 and 2 believe the "daughters of men" were preadamites.

[Esaias]

Regarding Teklemariam's "divine flesh" doctrine:

At the Council of Chalcedon, a belief known as Monophysitism was condemned. The Monophysites believed Christ had a single nature, unique to Him, resulting from the union of human and divine natures in the Incarnation. The churches excommunicated for that belief continued, and still exist. They are among the "Oriental Orthodox Churches", mainly in Egypt, Ethiopia, Syria, the Caucasus region, and northern Iran I believe.

The divine flesh teaching is a variation of Monophysitism, which is considered standard Orthodoxy in Ethiopia.

On a side note, Anabaptist leader Menno Simons taught divine flesh. His followers are called Mennonites and Amish.