Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So how's your Strong's Concordance going to stack up against my Strong's Concordance? We gonna have a "Battle of the Strong Concordances" now?
Please explain then why MY Strong shows plural "descendants".
And remember: neither Paul nor Mark knew ANYTHING about a virgin birth. Prove that they did, please. Show me where either one ever mentioned the virgin birth.
I DID. And you still haven't proven your case 100%.
As long as Strong's shows the word's root form a plural as I demonstrated in my last two posts, then the best you've done once again is played to stalemate. You haven't proven beyond a shadow of doubt for the readers here that the original writers whoever they were intended this passage to be a specific prophecy about the Messiah and Jesus.
Putting aside the utter ridiculousness of the idea of a bunch of scribes being able to look ahead some 1500 years to exact time Jesus would appear, it is clear that interpretation of this passage can swing either way---that's how vague it is worded. And I've already dissected EXACTLY how vague it is:
No mention of a Messiah; no mention of Jesus; no mention of a virgin birth; no mention of an atonement for sin. In other words no mention of ANYTHING that could literally be associated with Jesus. All you have is mumbo-jumbo of hatred (enmity) between a woman's offspring and offspring of a snake, and a snake biting someone on the leg and that someone stomping on the snake's head to kill it. Happens every day. Happened to Paul.
Only by the most painful stretching of the human imagination can any of this remotely resemble Jesus Christ and the devil. We don't even know if the snake IS the devil. That interpretation didn't roll around until long AFTER Jesus' crucifixion. That's when this thing about Genesis 3:15 started picking up momentum getting associated with Jesus and his atonement---when Christian philosophers started scouring the Old Testament for anything they could attach to Jesus to try to prove he was prophesied in the Old Testament.
Let the readers comprehend logically that if the writers of the Old Testament truly wanted their readers to believe Genesis was an authentic prophecy of Jesus God would have inspired the writers to say so plainly:
"And I will send my Son at some future time to remove the curse you have placed on mankind. His death on a tree will atone for man's sins and pay the debt you have imposed on your offspring."
Then there wouldn't be the slightest doubt what God was intending us to understand about this passage. As it stands it's just gibberish about a woman, her offspring, a snake, it's offspring and hatred between them.
The most logical interpretation is that it is stating women would hate snakes forever. And they do even today every time one slithers into their kitchen they jump on a stool and start screaming for their husbands to kill the snake. That's REAL "enmity between a woman's offspring and a snake's offspring. That's the real fulfillment of this supposed "prophecy".
zar·‘āh doesn't mean 'they.' It is translated as 'seed' or 'offspring' or 'descendants.' And while zar·‘āh is plural, the word hū is 3rd person singular - 'he.' There is a shift in Genesis 3:15 from the plural to the singular. Through a line of descent from the woman would ultimately come the Messiah.
Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring (zar·‘āh) and her offspring (zar·‘ă·ḵā); he (hū - 3rd person singular) shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”
Strong's Concordance
hu or hi: he, she, it
Original Word: הוּא
Part of Speech: pronoun 3rd person singular
Transliteration: hu or hi
Phonetic Spelling: (hoo)
Short Definition: this
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
a prim. pronoun
Definition
he, she, it
The apostle Paul was a scholar too. And he knew that the promise first given to the woman, and then to Abraham was fulfilled by Jesus.
Galatians 3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” — 14] so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith. 15] To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. 16]Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ.
Commenting on Galatians 3:16 Meyer's NT Commentary states the following.
Paul, following the analogy of Genesis 4:25 and thinking in τοῖς σπέρμασιν of several posterities by the side of each other, lays stress on the oneness of Abraham’s posterity expressed in the singular, the expression in the singular serving him only as the shortest means (?) for asserting a fact testified to by Scripture generally; but, on the other hand, he has, by means of estimating this unit of posterity in the light of the history of redemption, been able, and indeed obliged, to interpret τῷ σπέρματί σου as referring to Christ, the promised Saviour, without thereby maintaining that this expression in the singular could signify only an individual, and not a race of many members. But in this way everything which we are expected to read in the plain words is imported into them, and artificially imposed upon them, by the expositor. Galatians 3 Meyer's NT Commentary
The following traces the promise of the Messiah from the Genesis 3:15 to Galatians 3:15-16.
2) Trace the theme of the promised “seed” from Genesis 3:15 to Galatians 3:15-16.
The salvation of man and the destruction of Satan was promised in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:15). The “seed of the woman” was later revealed to be the “seed” of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3), of Isaac (Genesis 21:12; 25:19-26), of Jacob (Genesis 25:23; 27:27-29), and of Judah (Genesis 49:8-10). He was still later indicated to be the “seed” of David (2 Samuel 7:12-16). Further revelation indicated that He would both suffer for the sins of His people (Isaiah 52:13--53:12) and reign triumphantly as Israel’s King (Psalm 2, 110). He was to be both human (Genesis 3:15) and divine (Isaiah 9:6; Micah 5:2), born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14) in the village of Bethlehem (Micah 5:2). Jesus of Nazareth was the promised “seed,” fulfilling all of the prophecies related to his birth, suffering, death and resurrection (Galatians 3:13-16). He was rejected by the leaders of Israel and proclaimed among the Gentiles. This same Jesus is coming again, to triumph over His enemies and to rule over all creation (Acts 2:22-36; 7:2-53).
Luke traced Jesus' genealogy back through David, through Judah, through Jacob, through Isaac, through Abraham, and back to Adam. See Luke 3:23-38.
Genesis 3:15 then is a Messianic prophecy pointing to Jesus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
I DID. And you still haven't proven your case 100%.
Yes, I have. But you're not going to accept any proof because of your agenda to discredit Christianity. However, Genesis 3:15 is obviously a Messianic prophecy.
Last edited by Michael Way; 11-22-2015 at 11:10 AM..
You're hedging, Mike. Here's what MY Strong's Concordance shows:
PLURAL, in other words.
Looks to be both plural and singular...the definition I mean...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
