Quote:
Originally Posted by TGBTG
His argument was based on this scripture:
John 8
41Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
42Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.
So Branham's arguement was "why would the Jews say they were not born of fornication when Jesus said the devil was their Father?"
What do you guys think? Why did the Jews answer that way? |
John 8 proves Branham's version of "serpent seed" as fallacious.
The fact that the serpent [satan] has a seed but not a biological seed is the issue. Hence the two words employed in the Greek Text.
Those who opposed Yeshua were of the their father [pater] the devil. Yet, they claimed to be the offspring [sperma] of Abraham. That is, by lineage and by genetic breeding. Yeshua agreed with them that Abraham was indeed their father [of his sperma] but they were [nevertheless] "of" the devil.
One of Branham's errors [among many] was that the conjunction "of" indicated biological descent. Not so. Clearly they were of the devil but not of biological descent.
One can be of the "sperma" [literal descent of Abraham] and be "of" their "pater" the devil.
Rev 22 identifies the Old Serpent as the devil, satan.
The many folk tales, Big Foot, "missing link," Kaballah, etc is the stuff of fiction generated by men of UNregenerate minds.
One approaches the fork in the road ... believe the Word and Jesus' exposition or a failed group of folks who are ignorant, fearful, gullible and perhaps, forever deceived.
Even so, come soon Lord Jesus.
Threaded Mode
