• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Theology of Semen.

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
The written word never speaks for itself. Exegesis requires, at all times, eisegesis.

Correct exegesis requires that the one providing the explanation and interpretation agrees with the rest of God’s inspired word.

God reveals his truth to those he appoints to guide his people.

For Israel, it was Moses and the prophets whose writings were included in the scripture to create a history of God’s dealings with one nation...to demonstrate his relationship with them and to record how he responded to their actions.....both positively and negatively, creating precedents and a reliable history for those who came later.
Jesus used that history to re-educate the “lost sheep” about who Jehovah was and why the Jewish religious leaders were misrepresenting him horribly. Jesus was the exact representation of his Father’s love and mercy.....things that the nit picking legalists had lost.

The followers of Christ also left a history for the ones who would follow, knowing in advance that an apostasy was inevitable. As the last days approached, Jesus would appoint a “faithful slave” to make sure that his household was “fed” and that they recognised the good food from the junk food supplied by the abundant “weeds” in Christendom.

Jesus would gather them into one united brotherhood who would meet regularly to encourage one another (Hebrews 10:34-35) as they experienced the same kind of hatred and persecution that he and his first century disciples had to endure. (John 15:18-21)

There are no “lone rangers” in Christianity.....unity and strict adherence to Christ’s teachings would identify them.....love among themselves, (John 13:35) faithful to God’s kingdom by being no part of the world (John 18:36) and maintaining these things in all nations was a hard call, but through the power of God’s spirit, not impossible......nothing is impossible with God.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
God reveals his truth to those he appoints to guide his people.
Jesus said He would send the Spirit of truth to lead and guide us into all truth. God does appoint shepherds for the flock but they aren't the only ones that are supposed to listen to the Spirit of truth.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
There are no “lone rangers” in Christianity.....unity and strict adherence to Christ’s teachings would identify them.....love among themselves,
What about people locked in prison all alone? Why did Paul go in the wilderness of Arabia to confer with God alone for 2 years? I could go on but my point is that just because we identify Christ's true disciples by their love for each other doesn't mean that some people aren't for a time alone in this world although they can be present in spirit with the other believers. (1 Cor. 5:3) and yes they can love their brothers and sisters in Christ.

Some people are alone and they aren't necessarily going against the will of God. They may be outcasts because of the will of God.
 

Clara Tea

Well-Known Member
In an earlier thread I noted that ha-adam and Eve are originally, identical twins; Eve is a clone of ha-adam. The novelty of the penis/phallus is that it's the first incarnation of the beguiling serpent who has his way with human history after the rise of the phallus and the fall of the identical nature of nature’s original human twins (ha-adam and Eve). The factuality of this statement, where the Hebrew text of the scripture is concerned, leads to a theological pearl of immeasurable value when we realize it demands that, having come so far as to understand that ha-adam and Eve are female clones, we think about the perceived nature of the original firstborn of creation as he would exist in profound contradistinction to the usurper Cain who’s conceived not by the breath, or blood, of God (the masculine source of ha-adam and Eve's genesis), but by the novel flesh (and the newfangled seed that testifies to its violent, degenerate, genesis), which (the novel flesh), proposes to pose as a new truth created wholesale in Genesis 2:21.

In Genesis 2:21, two novel entities enter into the Garden of Eden, the phallus, manufactured by closing up the petals on ha-adam's tulip (the Hebrew says the two lips of ha-adam's femininity are sutured סגר together to form the first phallus, Midrash Rabbah, Bere****h, XVII, 6), and secondarily, but of equal importance, the testimony come through the novel new flesh: the semen.

This theological semen, i.e., the first instance of semen in the Torah, is so little remarked on in Jewish or Christian theology as to almost defy belief. It's hidden throughout the Tanakh, but in plain sight, so that it almost appears Jews and Christians together, to a man, have made a pact not to notice or think about the most fertile source for unlocking innumerable and fundamental secrets lurking beneath the petals and pages of the Torah text. It's almost as though Jews and Christians share one fundamental theological premonition: fear of the theological semen that might show them to be more symbiotically related than either theology can bear, precisely because it proves that though they may indeed be brothers from another mother, they in truth, and fact, share the same father, and thus the same seminally flawed testemony.



John
Is your assertion (that the phallus is the incarnation of the snake of the Garden of Eden) something that you invented, or did it come from Semenary school? Idolators might imagine their graven image rising from the ashes (like a phoenix).
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Then how come they circumcised Him on the 8th day? (Luke 2:27)

. . . I meant to imply that he was conceived apart from its use in the conception: his mother's pregnancy was a circumcised pregnancy where brit milah is understood to symbolize emasculation. The demon flesh was cut out of the process that conceived his mother's pregnancy through which he was born.


John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
What about people locked in prison all alone? Why did Paul go in the wilderness of Arabia to confer with God alone for 2 years? I could go on but my point is that just because we identify Christ's true disciples by their love for each other doesn't mean that some people aren't for a time alone in this world although they can be present in spirit with the other believers. (1 Cor. 5:3) and yes they can love their brothers and sisters in Christ.

Some people are alone and they aren't necessarily going against the will of God. They may be outcasts because of the will of God.

. . . In the so-called "old testament" only special prophets or men of God had one-on-one communication with the spirit of God. But after Christ's death, the ability to commune with the spirit of God personally, not just communally, has been opened up to all takers.

When God spoke personally to Abraham, Moses, David, or Isaiah, he revealed hidden mysteries, secrets, that weren't common, or communal, knowledge.

Today God speaks personally to all who can receive him.

To Dejee's point, it can appear that speaking personally to so many persons could create chaos, or disunity, disagreement, and thus be problematic to the family of God. And we know that David wasn't always beloved of those he ruled. Nor was Moses; or Isaiah. In fact, all three of the mentioned men were subjected to attempted murder by their own people, the very persons they were serving.

Nevertheless, God's spirit vouchsafes the safety of those who don't misuse the Word he incarnates inside them; and it's the same to this very day.


John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Is your assertion (that the phallus is the incarnation of the snake of the Garden of Eden) something that you invented, or did it come from Semenary school? Idolators might imagine their graven image rising from the ashes (like a phoenix).

On the contrary. Moses turned the idol to ash, mixed it with water, to produce the first pure menstruation, which is later called the "waters of niddah." Which is to say that Moses transforms the idol into the purification for idolatry by using the blood of the idol (made into the waters of niddah) as the solution (literally and figuratively) to sin.

The crucifix is the idol the blood of which cures and purifies from idolatry. The crucifix is the idol par excellent. And its excellence is that the fluid flowing from the destruction of the idol is the essence of the idol. Furthermore, the blood come from the destruction of the idol purifies from not only idolatry, but from the original, and all other sins, come, so to say, from the original sin, which was based on the production of a fleshly idol on the original human body.

Ritual circumcision ritually destroys that fleshly idol such that the blood come, so to say, from that destruction is pure, purifying, and sanctifying.

Blood inside a temple, i.e., a bodily home, represents life, while blood outside a temple, or body, represents death.

So how can the blood outside the fleshly, phallic, idol, represent sanctity and life? How can the blood outside of God's reproductive flesh, i.e., the crucifix, represent not death, but everlasting life?

Only to the degree that in both cases, the blood represents not the garden variety death, but, rather, the death of death itself. The death of death is everlasting life. And the blood of circumcision represents the death of death itself. The blood of the crucifix represents the death of death itself. And thus, everlasting life.

What's that Gatorade commercial say: Is it in you?



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
OK....from what we know now, the first verse of Genesis 1 is basically the “Big Bang”.

. . . Then are we to use what we know to get the text to speak to us more clearly? If so, then the more we know, the more willing the text might be to reveal things beyond what we know. The less we know, the less the text might be able to kick-start what we don't know.

We might even be tempted to say that the spirit gives superior knowledge to those who already have knowledge, and that even the little the ignorant have will be taken from them?



John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
In the context of the "spermatic word/utterances," the heart/mind is considered to be the womb. Therefore, the spermatic word is the small things that influence the mind on a primarily unconscious level--local customs, oral traditions, advertisements, memes, scriptures, gossip, symbolism, etc. The serpent "tempting" Eve in the Garden of Eden would fit this, and would fit into the Jewish tradition that the serpent wanted to mate with Eve.

In the original creation there was no rain to inseminate or water the earth-womb: the insemination was already in the earth. Everything needed was already in the womb. The earth-womb was opened when the living organism opened the womb for the first time with its hand, or branch, or limb.

There's only one human being who opened the womb with his hand. For all others the womb was already opened. The temple was already profaned, as part and parcel of their conception.

After Cain's birth Adam had a till, and used it to created the leavened bread human race. Jesus' family is unleavened.



John


 
Last edited:

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Jesus said He would send the Spirit of truth to lead and guide us into all truth. God does appoint shepherds for the flock but they aren't the only ones that are supposed to listen to the Spirit of truth.

God has never allowed his worshippers to be without appointed 'shepherds'. Never have his worshippers been allowed to formulate their own rules or to practice their worship according to their own inclinations.
As we know, Jesus is called "the Fine Shepherd" because he is the one leading all of his disciples who have a willingness to comply with his instructions.

But "Houston, we have a problem"......Jesus said that the "weeds" of false "Christianity" were going to be sown in the same "field" as the "wheat". Both were growing together in the world, right up to the end. So how do we identify the "weeds" so that we are not consumed by their falsehoods? How do we identify a clever counterfeit? By knowing the genuine article very well. If we know what Jesus taught and how it conforms to the scripture that he himself used, then we will understand how far removed today's "Christianity" is, and that it does not reflect the teachings of Christ at all. We can't pick and choose only what is comfortable.

Jesus has appointed his shepherds and we are to comply with their teaching and direction. (Hebrews 13:17)
The problem is that satan has his own shepherds who will lead the sheep down a wrong path by appealing to their own selfish inclinations. (an old tactic) Those choosing an easy way to practice their Christianity, are on the wrong road. (Matthew 7:13-14) The road to life is "cramped and narrow", so many find the restrictive nature of true Christianity to take them out of their comfort zone....so, they seek an easy way, but that road is a dead end. :(
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
. . . Then are we to use what we know to get the text to speak to us more clearly? If so, then the more we know, the more willing the text might be to reveal things beyond what we know. The less we know, the less the text might be able to kick-start what we don't know.

The danger is in talking ourselves into 'explanations' that come more from imagination than from scripture. We can read into texts things that are not there....like the trinity and hellfire for example. How many have swallowed those two blasphemies?
And I would include your assertions about the creation of Adam and his wife in that category as well. What conclusions can be reached that are in any way a true account of God's intentions with regard to the human race? I cannot even imagine where you think that will take you?

We might even be tempted to say that the spirit gives superior knowledge to those who already have knowledge, and that even the little the ignorant have will be taken from them

Ah, but God's spirit is not the only one imparting knowledge to humans.....the devil is a rival "god" who is not going to give up his position until God removes him as the god and ruler of this world. (2 Corinthians 4:3-4) His power to "blind" people to the truth would include excursions into things that are of no spiritual benefit.....his agenda is one of "rule or ruin".....he knows he can't win, but will take as many down with him as he can deceive......IMO, rabbit holes are dug by him and those who want to pervert true worship will get lost in them. Those exploring them can miss the treasures that are in plain sight.
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The danger is in talking ourselves into 'explanations' that come more from imagination than from scripture. We can read into texts things that are not there.

. . . As you did when you spoke of the Big Bang (which isn't in the scripture)?

Fwiw, nothing in your English Bible is in the scripture. "Jesus" isn't in the scripture. The English words, every one of them, is an interpretive translation of the signature word that was Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic. So when you keep speaking of what's in the scripture, you could be in danger of treating the scripture like a mirror that reflects back what you put into it. And it's factual to say there's nothing in the scripture until it's interpreted. And interpretation takes place by individuals as much as by religious cliques and or communities. There's not one word, not one sentence, not one page, of the scripture, that's not subject to, and that doesn't require, interpretation.

Interpretation is as much an art form as a science. And imagination, as in any art form, is a valuable part of sound interpretation.



John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
And I would include your assertions about the creation of Adam and his wife in that category as well. What conclusions can be reached that are in any way a true account of God's intentions with regard to the human race? I cannot even imagine where you think that will take you?

. . . Should we ask what conclusions can be reached before we follow the spirit of true interpretation? Which comes first, the sound practice of scriptural exegesis, or a litmus test that we say the interpretation must follow to be true to our theology?

Imo, we must follow the word, and the spirit, wherever they may lead, without requiring the spirit or the word to say what we think it has to say to be true to what we think is the truth.

Abraham was willing to kill his dear firstborn if that's what the spirit and the word told him to do, even though there are unimaginable problems with doing so. . . Are you willing to kill your beloved theology if the spirit and the word show you you must to follow the truth? Or will you deny the spirit of truth if it conflicts with your knowledge of truth?

Do you demand that the spirit follow what you know is true? Or is what the spirit and the word say, no matter how unorthodox, or peculiar, the truth that will bend your neck or knee no matter how stiff they might be?



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Ah, but God's spirit is not the only one imparting knowledge to humans.....the devil is a rival "god" who is not going to give up his position until God removes him as the god and ruler of this world. (2 Corinthians 4:3-4) His power to "blind" people to the truth would include excursions into things that are of no spiritual benefit.

But if a person is blinded by the false, or rival, god, then they think he is the real God. And that blinded person could technically be you or me.

Say an alien from the other side of the universe showed up on earth and had all knowledge and all power in comparison to we puny humans. Say before he arrived he memorized the Bible, and took the persona of the risen Jesus of Nazareth.

Say he could raise the dead (using super advanced science) and even manufacture living beings at will.

How would you know he wasn't Jesus? What litmus test would you use when he had the entire scripture memorized, and even every work of Luther, or Rashi, or Augustine, or whomever your favorite is? When you ask a question, he answers with a direct quote from Moses, or Paul, or Jesus, that fits your inquiry perfectly (Mark 13:22).



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
That is how I read Genesis 1:1-2. How about you?

Like you, at least I assume like you, I read it differently every time. I'm always wanting to bring more knowledge of scripture, science, and truth in general (to include reason, and logic, though they must be subject to the spirit) to bear on whatever verse or passage I'm studying. Consequently, I would be inclined to read Genesis 1:1 in a manner that would help shine a light on the topic of this thread: the theology of semen.

And trying to use Genesis 1:1 to uncover truths about the theology of semen is probably a perfect test case to display the kind of exegesis I do.

In the signature text of Genesis, the Hebrew letters weren't distinguished as words yet. The entire book of Genesis was one long word, one long string of Hebrew consonants. In this state the text is more of a cipher-text than a normal, modern, kind of text. And this isn't by accident, or lack. The Hebrew consonants (letters) can be read in more than one way to be determined by where word-breaks, sentence breaks, and such are placed.

Without drifting into a sermon on Hebrew language and exegesis, it can be stated that the first recognized word in the typical way of reading the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1 is the word "bere****" בראשית.

But, remembering that the signature text isn't a "demotic" text, but a "hieroglyphic" text, we can know that not only are sentences, or words, not the lowest common denominator of meaning, but that even the letters themselves are pictograms made up of more than one letter (the alef א is actually a vav ו with two yod י י on either side).

The first word in Genesis, בראשית, is actually the word for a Jewish daughter בת with the word for the firstborn ראש in its womb.

ב–ראש–ת

The letters on either side of the middle word spell "daughter" בת. And the word in the womb of the word for "daughter" בת, is the word for the "firstborn" ראש. Which is to say the firstborn of creation is hidden inside the first word in Genesis, which is the first daughter of God, as the first statement in the book of Genesis.

The first word in Genesis hides the Mystery Paul spoke of as being hidden since the casting down of creation (Romans 16:25) because of the original sin: that the first "daughter" בת of God, hid in her womb, from the point of her creation, the firstborn of creation, who is stillborn in the text, but born still, belatedly no doubt, but still born nevertheless, in a manger in Bethlehem.

Which is where the theology of semen comes into the picture. Using the same truisms concerning the nature of the Hebrew words and letters, remarkably, almost unbelievably, the word for "leaven" שאר, is an anagram of the word for "firstborn" ראש. Which might not seem that unbelievable or remarkable until we realize that the Hebrew word for where "leaven" is added to the dough, miseret משארת, is the word for "man," or "husband" מת (Gesenius), with the word for "leaven" שאר in its middle section.

In the same way that the "firstborn" ראש is found in the belly of the first daughter ב–ראש–ת, the anagram of the "firstborn," i.e., "leaven," is found in the first man, or husband, such that the word, miseret משארת, is the Hebrew word for the place where leaven from the first batch of dough is passed on to the next batch of dough. Which is to say the "leaven" in leavened-bread comes from the husband מת when he places the leaven that contaminated the first loaf (Cain) into the dough for the next loaf.

מ–שאר–ת

Do you see where this is going? Unleavened bread, the bread of the Passover, is bread not contaminated by the previous batch, or batches. Semen is leaven, and leaven is the male-seed placed into the warm oven every time a new loaf of leavened bread is made. We're all, every one of us, save one, the Savior, a loaf of bread contaminated by a tiny bit of Cain that's been passed down every time leaven is placed into the dough in the warm oven of procreation.

Jesus was made without leaven. He's unleavened bread; as is the new man made through rebirth. The new man in Christ is born without the leavening agent in the middle of man, such that the new man is the unleavened bread of life, not the leavened bread contaminated with death.



John
 
Last edited:

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
. . . Should we ask what conclusions can be reached before we follow the spirit of true interpretation? Which comes first, the sound practice of scriptural exegesis, or a litmus test that we say the interpretation must follow to be true to our theology?

Theology is man made....the truth is what is contained in God's word, and it is sufficient, along with his spirit which is operative on the right people. Christendom IMO is not the right people, and neither are the Jews....both strayed off the path because the devil was never going to allow his hold over mankind to be taken away without a fight. He managed to influence the Jews without them even acknowledging his existence. He was determined with God's faithful servant Job, to test that man's integrity under the most difficult of circumstances. But God permitted it....do you know why? Why is that account in the Bible?

Imo, we must follow the word, and the spirit, wherever they may lead, without requiring the spirit or the word to say what we think it has to say to be true to what we think is the truth.

You cannot trust what you can't identify. The devil is the god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:3-4; 1 John 5:19)....he controls what is going on in it...his power is exerted everywhere, so we have to be careful not to fall for the tantalizing morsels that fall from the wrong table. 'Curiosity killed the cat' you know....

Ephesians 2:1-3 talks about the "ruler of the authority of the air...the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience". We cannot afford to breathe that "air". I know that deception is never easy to spot when its a clever con....its not until it is exposed that you can see the damage it has done.

Abraham was willing to kill his dear firstborn if that's what the spirit and the word told him to do, even though there are unimaginable problems with doing so. . . Are you willing to kill your beloved theology if the spirit and the word show you you must to follow the truth? Or will you deny the spirit of truth if it conflicts with your knowledge of truth?

It was not blind obedience that led Abraham to willingly submit his son to a sacrificial death.....but you knew that, right?

Hebrews 11:17-19...
"By faith Abraham, when he was tested, as good as offered up Isaac—the man who had gladly received the promises attempted to offer up his only-begotten son18 although it had been said to him: “What will be called your offspring will be through Isaac.” 19 But he reasoned that God was able to raise him up even from the dead, and he did receive him from there in an illustrative way."

Abraham's faith in the resurrection allowed him to see past the temporary physical death because he had faith that all the promises of God had to come through Isaac. Whatever God asked of him, Abraham knew his God well enough not to question his judgment. Look at the conversation he had with God over Sodom and Gomorrah. (Genesis 18:22-32)

James 2:18-23...
"Nevertheless, someone will say: “You have faith, and I have works. Show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19 You believe that there is one God, do you? You are doing quite well. And yet the demons believe and shudder. 20 But do you care to know, O empty man, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father declared righteous by works after he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that his faith was active along with his works and his faith was perfected by his works, 23 and the scripture was fulfilled that says: “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness,” and he came to be called Jehovah’s friend."

And the circumstances of Abraham offering his son provided a vivid parallel of how God himself felt when he found it necessary to offer his only begotten son. The willingness of the father as well as the willingness of the son is pictorial. Isaac was a young man at the time and could quite easily have resisted his aged father.

Do you demand that the spirit follow what you know is true? Or is what the spirit and the word say, no matter how unorthodox, or peculiar, the truth that will bend your neck or knee no matter how stiff they might be?

I demand that my teachers will teach me God's word as directed by the holy spirit. It must agree with all that is written and follow one harmonious story from start to finish. Unless you have the big picture, how do you know where all the pieces fit? It is my experience that the majority have no big picture at all, and therefor have lots of pieces that they have collected from other sources that don't fit at all. In my belief system, there are no spare bits or missing bits...everything fits in very neatly. What we lost in Genesis is returned in Revelation. It is a simple scenario that has been made unnecessarily complex by those who want to add things that have no place.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
As you did when you spoke of the Big Bang (which isn't in the scripture)?

It fits with both the Bible and science...it was a single creative event. The universe has not always existed, which we know just from the uranium mined from our own soil.
Everything material is made up of atoms, and most atoms are stable. The exceptions, having unstable nuclei, are called “radioactive"....and the best known among them is uranium. To achieve stability, the unstable nucleus changes and, in the process, emits radiation in the form of small particles and rays. In this way the uranium is transformed into a succession of other elements and finally becomes the stable element, lead. Since uranium is still radio-active, it is proof that the universe is still young (in universal terms) otherwise wouldn't it all have become lead by now?

There's not one word, not one sentence, not one page, of the scripture, that's not subject to, and that doesn't require, interpretation.

Then we have to test out the word to see if it agrees with what is in alignment with God's purpose.
Can I ask you what you believe God's purpose is? Why are we here? Where is life on earth destined to be in the future?

But if a person is blinded by the false, or rival, god, then they think he is the real God. And that blinded person could technically be you or me.

Perhaps. But the Bible teaches us to spot the fakes.

Say an alien from the other side of the universe showed up on earth and had all knowledge and all power in comparison to we puny humans. Say before he arrived he memorized the Bible, and took the persona of the risen Jesus of Nazareth.

Say he could raise the dead (using super advanced science) and even manufacture living beings at will.

How would you know he wasn't Jesus? What litmus test would you use when he had the entire scripture memorized, and even every work of Luther, or Rashi, or Augustine, or whomever your favorite is? When you ask a question, he answers with a direct quote from Moses, or Paul, or Jesus, that fits your inquiry perfectly (Mark 13:22).

I guess this would come down to knowing God, knowing Christ, knowing their roles, and the purpose of our being. Everything has to fit those parameters.

If someone came to earth and said they were Jesus Christ in the flesh, I would reject them outright no matter how convincing others might see them to be. Why? For the same reason that I don't line up to pay homage to a fence post with an image of Jesus on it...or a weeping statue....or some other 'miraculous' thing.

Jesus said the world will behold him no more, so I believe him.
I have no "favorites" btw. My favorite is the Bible...the simplicity of which is more than enough for me to live by. Follow the teachings of the Christ.....how can you go wrong? You stay out of rabbit holes.
 
Last edited:

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Like you, at least I assume like you, I read it differently every time. I'm always wanting to bring more knowledge of scripture, science, and truth in general (to include reason, and logic, though they must be subject to the spirit) to bear on whatever verse or passage I'm studying. Consequently, I would be inclined to read Genesis 1:1 in a manner that would help shine a light on the topic of this thread: the theology of semen.

And trying to use Genesis 1:1 to uncover truths about the theology of semen is probably a perfect test case to display the kind of exegesis I do.

In the signature text of Genesis, the Hebrew letters weren't distinguished as words yet. The entire book of Genesis was one long word, one long string of Hebrew consonants. In this state the text is more of a cipher-text than a normal, modern, kind of text. And this isn't by accident, or lack. The Hebrew consonants (letters) can be read in more than one way to be determined by where word-breaks, sentence breaks, and such are placed.

Without drifting into a sermon on Hebrew language and exegesis, it can be stated that the first recognized word in the typical way of reading the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1 is the word "bere****" בראשית.

But, remembering that the signature text isn't a "demotic" text, but a "hieroglyphic" text, we can know that not only are sentences, or words, not the lowest common denominator of meaning, but that even the letters themselves are pictograms made up of more than one letter (the alef א is actually a vav ו with two yod י י on either side).

The first word in Genesis, בראשית, is actually the word for a Jewish daughter בת with the word for the firstborn ראש in its womb.

ב–ראש–ת

The letters on either side of the middle word spell "daughter" בת. And the word in the womb of the word for "daughter" בת, is the word for the "firstborn" ראש. Which is to say the firstborn of creation is hidden inside the first word in Genesis, which is the first daughter of God, as the first statement in the book of Genesis.

The first word in Genesis hides the Mystery Paul spoke of as being hidden since the casting down of creation (Romans 16:25) because of the original sin: that the first "daughter" בת of God, hid in her womb, from the point of her creation, the firstborn of creation, who is stillborn in the text, but born still, belatedly no doubt, but still born nevertheless, in a manger in Bethlehem.

Which is where the theology of semen comes into the picture. Using the same truisms concerning the nature of the Hebrew words and letters, remarkably, almost unbelievably, the word for "leaven" שאר, is an anagram of the word for "firstborn" ראש. Which might not seem that unbelievable or remarkable until we realize that the Hebrew word for where "leaven" is added to the dough, miseret משארת, is the word for "man," or "husband" מת (Gesenius), with the word for "leaven" שאר in its middle section.

In the same way that the "firstborn" ראש is found in the belly of the first daughter ב–ראש–ת, the anagram of the "firstborn," i.e., "leaven," is found in the first man, or husband, such that the word, miseret משארת, is the Hebrew word for the place where leaven from the first batch of dough is passed on to the next batch of dough. Which is to say the "leaven" in leavened-bread comes from the husband מת when he places the leaven that contaminated the first loaf (Cain) into the dough for the next loaf.

מ–שאר–ת

Do you see where this is going? Unleavened bread, the bread of the Passover, is bread not contaminated by the previous batch, or batches. Semen is leaven, and leaven is the male-seed placed into the warm oven every time a new loaf of leavened bread is made. We're all, every one of us, save one, the Savior, a loaf of bread contaminated by a tiny bit of Cain that's been passed down every time leaven is placed into the dough in the warm oven of procreation.

Jesus was made without leaven. He's unleavened bread; as is the new man made through rebirth. The new man in Christ is born without the leavening agent in the middle of man, such that the new man is the unleavened bread of life, not the leavened bread contaminated with death.

All I can say about that is why on earth would you believe something so far fetched.....and unsupported by the Bible's overall theme.

Who is Jesus and why did he come to earth as a human child?
Why did he have to die a sacrificial death?

How does the person of Jesus even fit into such a strange scenario as you have stated above?

Who else believes what you believe?

The role of the Christ and the nature of the Kingdom was the mystery that Paul spoke about in Romans 16:25. It was a false expectation on the part of the Jews that caused them to reject Jesus....He simply did not fit the profile given to him by those who taught from the scriptures. They painted the wrong picture of the Messiah and the whole nation missed him because they believed the wrong people. History is repeating.

The role of the Christ (Messiah) was shrouded in mystery for many generations. Who was the 'seed' who would crush the serpent's head? (Genesis 3:15) The Kingdom of God was thought to be the earthly establishment of God's rulership on the earth by means of his anointed King which would see the Jews elevated out of the oppression that Gentile powers had exercised over them for centuries. The "appointed times of the nations" is something Daniel foretold and something Jesus referred to as well. (Luke 21:24) What did it mean?

These are the questions that beg for answers...IMO.
 
Top