Then in Gal. 3:29 these children of God are called
> the "seed" (sperma) of Abraham. Tie this with Rom. 9:8 where it clearly
> "... They which are the children of the
> flesh, these are not the children of
> God: but the children of the promise
> are counted for the seed (sperma)."
Please note that the "children of the promise" referred to here are more comprehensively described by Paul in Galatians 4:22-23:
Gal 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
Gal 4:23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
"Children of the flesh" are genetic descendants of Ishmael [read: Arabs] who are not heirs to the everlasting covenant God made with Abraham through Jacob, whereas "children of the promise", the genetic descendants of Jacob, are:
And I will establish my covenant between me and thee [Abraham] and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. Gen 17:7 Even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant, 1Ch 16:16-17
What Paul is doing here is relating that it's only the genetic descendants of Jacob, "children of the promise", who are heirs to the everlasting covenant [read: the promise], and that those who are not genetic descendants of Jacob are "children of the flesh".
So when you ask "So we know that children of God become God's children by God's sperma. But is this only a physical process?", the answer is "yes, this can only be a physical process because this is what God's Word says".
> Lastly on the sperma issue, I must point out that Christ told the
> Jews that He knew that they were Abraham's seed (sperma) in John 8:37.
> Thus I can logically conclude that they were Abraham's physical seed
> (sperma - John 8:37) and thus Edomites (because they had never been in
> bondage - John 8:33) and they were ALSO Satan's spiritual seed (sperma -
> John 8:44).
We should point out that in 5,000 years of Israelite history, they never before made reference to a "spiritual seed". The "seed" which is repeated numerous times in the Scripture, as well as in the above verses, is the Hebrew word "zera" which always means genetic descendants. But now you've created an entirely new doctrine by interpreting the same Greek word "sperma" as both a genetic descendant and a "spiritual descendant".
We need to stop and do a simple sanity check here. If this concept of a "spiritual Israel" is never mentioned in the entire Old Testament, then what changed with Paul that there suddenly IS a "spiritual Israel"? Isn't this such an important change in concepts that the Greeks would have had a special word for it? Why claim that they used the exact same Greek word "sperma" to refer to both genetic descendants and "spiritual Israel"? Why would Paul make it clear in one verse that "he of the freewoman" Rebekkah is "by promise" and "he of the bondwoman" Hagar are "born after the flesh" is an analogy between two different genetic seeds (Ishmael and Jacob), and then switch in another verse to a genetic and a spiritual one?
You were very close to explaining why it is that the jews were so upset with Jesus that they wanted to crucify Him, but then you veered off course by creating a "spiritual Israel". Go back and put Galatians 4:22 and 1 Chronicles 16:16 into context with what Paul wrote, throw out these new creations "spiritual Israelites", resort to the trusty, long understood meanings of "zera" and "sperma", and tell us flat out why the jews replied "we be not born of fornication [read: miscegenation], we have one father, God".
Thanks for the email and concern. This is my first response to
Emahiser's work. I do it not for his benefit (as his mind is made up)
but for those still willing to prove all things. I never responded
before as most of his arguments are addressed in my book. Also, in his
first chapter, his first page identifies him for who and what he is. He
"Let's consider 1 John 3:12: 'Not as
Cain, who was of that wicked one,
and slew his half brother ...' "
Notice that he added the word "half" to the Word of God. The Greek word
for half is Strong's #2255 hemisu and does not appear in any Greek text
of I John 3:12. Emahiser (hereafter Emah) simply added it to prove his
point. However, adding to God's word has a heavy penalty per Rev.
22:18. I know many Seedliners (most of them are friends) and they don't
add to God's Word. They simply interpret it differently. Thus, I
believe that Emah has identified himself with those who have throughout
history added to and taken away from God's Word.
For your benefit, I'll address his chapter one and (Lord - willing)
in a later email address his chapter 4.
Chapter 1 -
Emah starts off by identifying me as a one-seedliner or non-seedliner.
I find this amusing because anyone who has read my book knows that I
believe that the fallen angels of Gen. 6 produced a demonic seedline.
But for Emah to tell folks that would not allow him to prejudice their
minds as he wishes. On top of this, had he bothered to write me at the
address provided in my book, he would have learned that I believe that
God created 3 separate groups of humans; the Orientals being the oldest,
the Negroids, and the Adamic people. But it is easier to rant, invent
and build strawmen rather than investigate.
Emah next blows off Genesis 4:1 by saying that Eve was already
pregnant. Yet the Hebrew does not agree. "Conceived" is #2029 harah /
to conceive / become pregnant / progenitor / etc.. It comes down in the
Hebrew that Adam had sex with his wife and the result of this sexual
relationship was that his wife became pregnant. The child that was
produced from this pregnancy was Cain. If you are confused by the
wording in the KJV, then read it in the NIV:
"Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she
became pregnant and gave birth to
Cain. ..." Gen. 4:1 NIV
Next Emah makes a big deal out of the word "of" in I John 3:12 and
claims that "When used of a person, it means 'a son of.'" While this is
often true it (the word "of") is also used to mean "a part or member of"
too (See Acts 10:1 where Cornelius is a member of the Italian band).
"Of" is Strong's #1537 and is the Greek word "Ex" and is a primary
preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action
proceeds), from, out (of) .... So you can see that "Yes" it can mean
"son of" or it can also refer to the one who causes action (without the
moving person being an actual physical son) - i.e. the driving spirit.
There are other applications for the word "of" also but I'm not going to
type the whole Lexicon here.
Next Emah quotes I John 3:12 from several Bible translations as
"proof" for his position but each one of them supports my position
Now Emah quotes 3 commentaries (The Wycliffe Bible Commentary,
Matthew Poole's Commentary, and Matthew Henry's Commentary) dealing with
I John 3:12 to prove that his position is right. What he fails to tell
the readers is that none of those commentators ever taught or believed
the Satanic Seedline teaching and taken in context, all three were
saying that Cain was spiritually of the Devil. In short, Emah wilfully
mislead his readers. Of course, knowing what he did with Scripture
earlier I find this par for the course.
Now Emah actually comes up with an argument of merit. He points out
that the word "seed" in I John 3:9 is Strong's #4690 sperma and thus
concludes that you can't get more genetic than that. My position is
that when we are born again this spiritual birth is also described with
sperma just as physical birth is. For some proof I would like you to
note that those born of God by... "his seed" in I John 3:9 are also
called "children of God" in verse 10. So we know that children of God
become God's children by God's sperma. But is this only a physical
process? Galatians 3:26 says we become children of God by faith in
Christ Jesus. This sounds more like a spiritual process rather than a
physical process. Then in Gal. 3:29 these children of God are called
the "seed" (sperma) of Abraham. Tie this with Rom. 9:8 where it clearly
"... They which are the children of the
flesh, these are not the children of
God: but the children of the promise
are counted for the seed (sperma)."
You can also tie in Romans 4:13-18.
Lastly on the sperma issue, I must point out that Christ told the
Jews that He knew that they were Abraham's seed (sperma) in John 8:37.
Thus I can logically conclude that they were Abraham's physical seed
(sperma - John 8:37) and thus Edomites (because they had never been in
bondage - John 8:33) and they were ALSO Satan's spiritual seed (sperma -
In dealing with Gen. 3:15 he does not present my position but it's
in my book and is just as plausible as his position. In my opinion it's
better than his but we all do think highly of ourselves, so you be the
Next Emah feigns stupidity by building a ridiculous strawman. In
dealing with John 8:44 he tells his readers that those who oppose his
views interpret this verse as saying that Cain only spiritually murdered
his brother. I've never taught such a stupid thing nor have I ever
heard such a thing from others who oppose the Satanic Seedline teaching.
Once again, his deception is par for the course. In my book I pointed
out that the word "father" #3962 in John 8:44 is used of both physical
and spiritual children (See I Cor. 4:15). So if we are honest with John
8:44 we must confess that this verse can be viewed either way. It does
not prove the issue.
So here you have my reply to chapter one of Emah's "Special Notice
to ALL WHO DENY two seedline IDENTITY".
For those who wish to read my book it is "The Satanic Seedline: It's
Doctrine and History" by Jeffrey A. Weakley. You can order it from CPA
Books, P.O. Box 596, Boring, Oregon 97009. It costs $5.00 and shipping
is $3.00 (total $8.00). And for those who don't want to buy it, Sir
Charles is going to try to post it on the web for you. (Note that the
one from CPA Books is slightly revised - Charles will be posting the