[Quix]

I certainly didn't read every line . . .

But . . . uhhhhh

could you note specifically how the blood line of

Cain

survived the flood and hijacked Noah's blood line?

[Talking_Mouse]

Thank you. That was exactly what I thought when I read the headline.

[sirchtruth]

could you note specifically how the blood line of Cain survived the flood and hijacked Noah's blood line?

Good question!

[lupie]

That is exactly my question and rebuttal. No physical descendants of Cain lived. Not only that, but from what little I read, I see that the whole article is based on selective definitions from Strong's.

Here are the entire entries:
07017 Qeyniy {kay-nee'} or Qiyniy (1 Chr 2:55) {kee-nee'} from 07014; TWOT - 2016; adj patr

Kenite = "smiths"
1) the tribe from which the father-in-law of Moses was a member and which lived in the area between southern Palestine and the mountains of Sinai

Now the root word: 07014 Qayin {kah'-yin} the same as 07013 (with a play upon the affinity to 07069); AV - Cain 17, Kenite 1; 18
n pr m Cain = "possession"
1) eldest son of Adam and Eve and the first murderer having murdered his brother Abel

n pr gent Kenite = "smiths"
2) the tribe from which the father-in-law of Moses was a member and which lived in the area between southern Palestine and the mountains of Sinai

The fact that Moses father-in-law was a Kenite, means that somewhere more than likely, there was another person named Cain who came after the flood.

To me then, the whole premise of the article is biased. It would seem to me to be a variation of James Sire's "Scripture Twisting" of selective citing. Where instead of citing select passage to prove ones point while ignoring the others, it does it with definitions. I've notice this happens quite a bit with heretical teachings based on definitions of Hebrew words. I know the the W-F people do it often.

[ET(end tyranny)]

Genesis 6
4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.

[ladyinred]

could you note specifically how the blood line of Cain survived the flood and hijacked Noah's blood line?

Arnold Murray's explanation for this is that Noah was told to take Two of ALL flesh into the Ark. Where most of us take that to mean animals, Murray says they also included the "races." (or some such nonsense)

[claptrap]

Apparently you havent read the whole account of Noah he
took his son-in-laws with him, maybe you should know more before offer your nasty comments the author obviously spent time researching this your reply looks like you spent the better part of five minutes typing it!

[Buggman]

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to point that out when I saw the title. Thanks for not letting the thread get too far in before doing so.