“…TWO SEEDS OF GENESIS 3:15…
WITHOUT THIS KNOWLEDGE,
you will be unable, incapable, of understanding
the Holy Bible and the unfolding of History.…”
—Willie Martin
I herein conclude considering is Willie Martin’s Scriptures The One Seedliners Deny (you can find my articles on Martin here). At one point there is reference to that which is titled “The Serpent of Genesis 3 Taken from Appendix 19 of ‘The Companion Bible’” yet, due to the formatting of the webpage I can only discern where it is Martin’s words and when it is the Companion Bible’s by tone alone (emphasis in all quotations is in the original).
As it typical of serpent seedline of Satan theorists, since the Bible does not teach their claims they must reinterpret it towards their ends as per the eisegetical presuppositions.
Thus, we are told that “The following terms are all vital to the understanding of What happened in the Garden of Eden.” As you may have guessed, tree does not mean tree but has something to do with sex. Yet, moreover, we are told, and here it is obviously Willie Martin writting:
The word tree also carries a racial meaning as in the words of Jesus Christ in above named references to the Gospels. The Tree of Life is identified as Jesus Christ.
What personage was represented by the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil? Please be consistent! If Jesus Christ was life who was the author of Death? Satan if you will believe it, was symbolized by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
Of course, as with any term in any language a word can have more than one definition and be otherwise employed literally or symbolically. No, consider that the claim is that eating of the fruit of the forbidden tree really means having sex with Satan.
Recall that in Genesis 2 Adam was allowed to eat of any tree in the garden with the one exception and including the Tree of Life. Well, now we are told that “The Tree of Life is identified as Jesus Christ” so, apparently, Adam and Eve could have sex with Jesus. This is the conclusion only if we are “consistent!” as Martin asks us to be—only within his context, of course.
Other considered words are eat which does not mean eat but has something to do with sex. Also, food which does not mean food but has something to do with sex. Also, fruit which does not mean fruit but has something to do with sex. Also, touch which does not mean touch but has something to do with sex.
I begin to wonder if this is about getting into the mind of God or says a lot more about the minds, the dirty sex crazed minds, or serpent seedline of Satan theorists—what would Sigmund Freud say?
Another considered term is desire and we are told that “Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines Desire as “Sexual appetite or a sexual urge.” Firstly, indeed, this is from the modern “Dictionary of the” modern “English Language” and not ancient Hebrew. Secondly, as if desire can only refer to a sexual appetite or a sexual urge.
Another term is naked so, finally, we are getting somewhere! Willie Martin does what is common to serpent seedline of Satan theorists which is to play gotcha! by asking question which supposedly can only be answered via their theory. He asks:
What did Eve and then Adam do that made them ashamed of their nakedness? Why did they hide themselves? What was the sin that they had committed? What did they do to suddenly become ashamed of their naked bodies? Why did they make themselves aprons of fig leaves? What part of their body did the apron cover? Why did they hide or cover this portion of their nakedness?...The attempt to cover the reproductive organs with an apron made from fig leaves indicates the nature of the original sin committed in the Garden of Eden. If they sinned with their eyes by reading or looking at something why did they not make themselves blindfolds? Why did they cover themselves with aprons? Because they were now ashamed.
Well, his answer is that “they were now ashamed” due to that which they had done with them: Eve had sex with Satan, Jesus and whomever is represented by the various other trees.
In Genesis 2 the Bible focuses upon the fact that being naked they were not ashamed. Yet, the fall brought about their knowledge of both good and also evil so they came to know that, as Jerry Seinfeld put it in an episode of his comedy show: there is good naked and bad naked. In other words, they lost their shamelessness and recognized that there is more to nakedness than simply not wearing clothes.
Yet, there appears to be deeper symbolism as they seem to attempt to cover their sin via a works based manner: making coverings for themselves. However, God provides a sacrifice and make clothes for them.
Another term is seed which, you guessed it, goes not mean seed but has something to do with sex. In this case, they are on to something as, ultimately, the woman’s see is Jesus.
In short, since I have deal with the issue of such terminology before, the interested reader can consult Disambiguating the serpent seedline of Satan theory in Genesis 3part 1 and part 2.
Willie Martin also appeals to Matthew 13 since serpent seedline of Satan theorists focus on some of Jesus’ parables and claim that He was teaching the serpent seedline of Satan theory but when read for what they clearly state that it is all about actions and not genetics.
I went into this in the most succinct manner in Serpent Seed of Satan article in a Christian Apologetics Journal.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page.
Twitter: #Seedlines, #ChristianIdentity, #Racism
Facebook: #Seedlines, #ChristianIdentity, #Racism