Considerations Of Genesis 6:1-4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally I'm of the belief the Sons of God were demons, because in Job 1 the angels are called Sons of God and in Job 38:7 God Himself call the angels Son of God, also Jude alludes to the angels that did not keep their proper abode 1:6 and also Peter talks about these same angels being kept in the Abussos, a different place than Hades where human souls are awaiting judgement.

Another hint is Paul tells us Jesus descendeed and Peter tells us He preached, He preached to the souls in Paradise He was their Savior and He descended lower and preached He wa the Last Adam and He had accomplished what the first Adam didn't, place then world in subjection Gen 1:28.

As for Matt 22:30, given and given in marriage are two different words, one means to marry and the other means to marry off a daughter, personally I believe there are female angels, if every human has a gaurdian angel, do you really beleive Father would assign a male angel to guard little girls, young girls\women, or women?

And if it was the sons if cain and the sons of seth, they are still marring today, where are the giants like the Anakim and Goliath?

Here's another hint if anyone can receive it, after the flood man became a meat eater, is it possible angels and demons are turned of by meat, remember the Manna? Is it possible that God was protecting man from this happening again?

Also, there is a well documented account in Time magazine, back in the '50's of a Philipino girl in prison being raped by demons ane in disperation the prison called two Christian missionaires to come and help.

Seems to me there is much more Biblical evidence that the Sons of God were the Sons of God like He said they were, and besides, what is the problem in believing that they were?

Blessings,

Gene

Hello Gene!!

I believe that this is the first time that we have disagreed on something.

Job 1:6
"Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them".

Literally, these are divine beings or as we have grown to know them....Angels. These are not fallen or demons. They are servants that serve God's court in heaven.

Because angels are referred to as "sons of God" in Job 1, there is no correct way to extrapolate that to mean the "sons of God in Genesis 6" are those same angels or that they are demons/fallen angels.

Judges in Israel were called "sons of God" because they bore the character of God in their judging. (Gen. 23:6; 30:8; Ex. 15:15).

The Aramaic targum Onkelos supports the "sons of god" as being nobel men.

The Greek Symmachus translation is..."sons of the kings or lords".

Archaeology has now attested the fact through finds that a Near East king was consistently referred to as the "son of his god".

Nimrod, in Genesis was called the SUN god by the Babylonians and his son Tamuz was called the "SON of god" and he was Nimrods human son.

Gene......there is not one single verse that indicates that there are female angels my brother. Neither are there any indication of baby angels. There is just no Biblical proof.

I do not believe that there are "guardian" angels. I am one who believes that we are helped and support by the one Jesus promised us.....The Holy Spirit. Jesus did not promise guardian angels, He promised that He would send the Comforter..

As for meat eating. Man turned to eating meat because there was no crops left alive after the flood. That is why Noah took more than two of every kind, so that his family would survive until the crops planted came in.

Gene.....the problem lies in the line of the Messiah being born. IF....IF these were demons, fallen angels and they intermarried with humans and produced children, anf those children had children, sooner or later that means the blood line leading to the birth of the sinless Son of God had the blood of Satan/demons in it!!!! Do we really think that is the case?????

I know that all of us will say...NO, NO. But if we just think about it for a moment, we will, I think come to that conclusion. In fact, what other conclusion could there be?????
 
IF...IF demons were the sons of god and did in fact have sex with the daughters of men (humans) and we discard the human line of humans intermarrying with the un-godly line of Cain, then YES, Cain's seed would have been on the Ark.

Now extrapolate that down through the ages and you will be seeing that the demonic off springs of demons and humans then came to believe God and Christ and were saved and are living with us today. THINK! How is that possible???


Yes that would be absurd (but not all of Cain's daughters had offspring or relations with fallen angels...God would have made sure these were all destroyed)...I believe Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives were all of Seth's line (however I see nothing to assume either way) but even if there was some mixing it makes no difference, it does not mean the seed of the angel/human relation was carried through.

So even if the mothers of the nephilim WERE daughters of Cain (which is opposed by what the actual wording says) this does not mean EVERY daughter of Cain was such a mother...also the offspring of Cain's line mixed with Seth's line are not automatically "evil" because of their line...all were people AFTER THE FALL, and thus all would have eventually sinned. In other words, Cain's seed does not automatically equal Demonic or even EVIL any more than Seth's seed (him being made in the likeness and image of the fallen Adam) automatically equals all being "godly" (or even that they ALL sought God or called on His name)...both of these are assumptions not based in the scriptures (not saying you believe this)...because this is all we can know, "extrapolating" is unfounded and unnecessary because we are all heirs of the consequence of the fall. IF such seed as you describe was carried down through the ages (not just Cain genes but the angelically influenced ones) then THAT would make no sense....there is no "salvation" in Christ for angels...
 
IF...IF demons were the sons of god and did in fact have sex with the daughters of men (humans) and we discard the human line of humans intermarrying with the un-godly line of Cain, then YES, Cain's seed would have been on the Ark.

Now extrapolate that down through the ages and you will be seeing that the demonic off springs of demons and humans then came to believe God and Christ and were saved and are living with us today. THINK! How is that possible???


Yes that would be absurd (but not all of Cain's daughters had offspring or relations with fallen angels...God would have made sure these were all destroyed)...I believe Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives were all of Seth's line (however I see nothing to assume either way) but even if there was some mixing it makes no difference, it does not mean the seed of the angel/human relation was carried through.

So even if the mothers of the nephilim WERE daughters of Cain (which is opposed by what the actual wording says) this does not mean EVERY daughter of Cain was such a mother...also the offspring of Cain's line mixed with Seth's line are not automatically "evil" because of their line...all were people AFTER THE FALL, and thus all would have eventually sinned. In other words, Cain's seed does not automatically equal Demonic or even EVIL any more than Seth's seed (him being made in the likeness and image of the fallen Adam) automatically equals all being "godly" (or even that they ALL sought God or called on His name)...both of these are assumptions not based in the scriptures (not saying you believe this)...because this is all we can know, "extrapolating" is unfounded and unnecessary because we are all heirs of the consequence of the fall. IF such seed as you describe was carried down through the ages (not just Cain genes but the angelically influenced ones) then THAT would make no sense....there is no "salvation" in Christ for angels...

No sir. I am not saying anything like that. I am simply brining up the obvious possibility that would exist.

As for "not every daughter of Cain was such a mother.

While that may be true, it is also just as true that only 8 people were saved out of the entire population of the earth at that time.

But..........if these demonic beings were so able to visit, fool human women, then marry them, have sex with them, how could we be absolutely sure that non survived the flood ?

Could....again, simply thinking out loud, could the son of Noah, Ham who saw his naked father have been the actions of someone who had a demonic thought in is heart??

You see, when we allow the thinking of a demon with humans who produce children, we open Pandora's box!!

That, among other things is why I conclude that the "sons of God" were the Godly line of Seth and the "daughters of men" was the ungodly human line from Cain.

Again.....since it is not in the Scriptures, how could we know that God did not allow it. IF>....He allowed the mixing of demonic blood( Is there even such a thing) with human blood , how could we be 100% sure. We can't. We can hope, we can think but we could never be positive, IF we believe that demons had sex with humans, it opens the door of demon DNA or whatever it is to be in the birth line of the Lord Jesus.

To me, that alone is something that should be considered very carefully!
 
Well we believe ALL these angels were cast into prison in chains under darkness until the judgment. But as of their personal offspring, they were all destroyed (if one holds the fallen angels view) because otherwise of the 8 souls that survived one or more would have to have been Nephilim (which they were not)…

E.W. Bullinger in his commentary to the Companions Bible believes some existed after the flood but as a result of a second attempt to corrupt by a smaller band…none of these will be among the saved, because of their rank and utter apostasy eternally having chosen to reject and be separate from God.

The progeny of the fallen angels with the daughters of Adam are called in Gen.6, “Nephilim”, which means “fallen ones” (from “nephal”, to fall). What these beings were can be gathered only from Scripture. They were evidently great in size, as well as great in wickedness. They were superhuman, abnormal beings; and their destruction was necessary for the preservation of the Human race, and out of faithfulness of Jehova’s word (Gen. 3:5).


This is why the Flood was brought “upon the world of the ungodly” (II Pet.2:5) as prophesied by Enoch (Jude 4).


But we read of the “Nephilim” again in Numbers 13:33: “there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, which came of the “Nephilim”. How, it may be asked, could this be, if they were all destroyed in the Flood? The answer is contained in Gen.6:4, where we read: “There were Nephilim in the Earth in those days (i.e. in the days of Noah); and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became the mighty men (Heb. “Gibbor”, the heroes) which were of old, men of renown” (lit. men of the name”, i.e. who got a name and were renowned for their ungodliness).

So that “after that”, i.e. after the Flood, there was a second irruption of these fallen angels, evidently smaller in number and more limited in area, for they were for the most part confined to Canaan, and were in fact known as ”the nations of Canaan”. It was for the destruction of these, that the sword of Israel was necessary, as the Flood had been before.

As to the date of this second irruption, it was evidently soon after it became known that the seed was to come from Abraham; for, when he came out from Haran (Gen.12:6) and entered Canaan, the significant fact is stated: “The Canaanite was then (i.e. already) in the land.” And in Gen.14:5 they were already known as “Rephaim” and ”Emim” , and had established themselves at Ashteroth, Karnaim, and Shaveh Kiriathaim.

In Gen.15:18-21 they are enumerated and named among Canaanite peoples: “Kennites, and the Kinezzites, and the Rephaims, and the Amorites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites” (Gen.15:19-21; cp. Ex.3,8,17; Ex.23:23; Deut.7; Deut.20:17; Josh.12:8).

These were to be cut off, driven out, and utterly destroyed (Duet.20:17, Josh.3:10). But Israel failed in this (Josh.13:13,15:63,16:10,17:18; Judg.1:19,20,28,29,30-36;2:1-5;3:1-7); and we know not how many got away to other countries to escape the general destruction. If this were recognized it would go far to solve many problems connected with Anthropology.”
 
A problem arises in how we understand certain terms..."demons" (as we think of them in Greek and Latin folklore) are never really what God was speaking about. As you know these are simply certain orders of angels, who are actually "persons" (only normally non-corporeal), but not a separate class of creatures who were created or made to be evil ethereal tormenters...we see how consistently they will to dwell in a body all through the New Testament. The word demon was chosen because it was the word which most closely allies with the original Hebrew concept (like when choosing the Logos to imply the Memra of the Lord). In Logos we can interpret imply as the cosmic mind or logic of God whereas with the Memra of YHVH He is a specific hypostasis of YHVH Himself...fully YHVH yet in a sense separate from Him (thus with) as we see in Exodus 3 and Isaiah 48.

I think when we conclude "We can hope, we can think but we could never be positive, IF we believe that demons had sex with humans, it opens the door of demon DNA or whatever it is to be in the birth line of the Lord Jesus." It is an erroneus leap of logic. Secondly if these were spirits who were manifest IN THE FORM OF A MAN, they would have MAN DNA...non-corporeal spirits do not have DNA...so no this would not be the case.
 
First off, I did not mean to imply that any seed or daughters of Cain, meant demonic blood. I simply meant that while I previously thought that the flood was called down and wiped Cain's seed from the earth - but always wondered if the females had cain's bloodline in the ark. With the name of Lamech, both as father to Noah, and the Lamech of Cain's line, it seems clear to me that one might well have been named after the other.
I am well aware of the theories propounded on the years, ages of the 1st Patriarchs. The Bible would relate the same year system whatever dating sysyem was used. And if you do the math, it shows that from Adam on down (thru the Seth line) that they lived until Noah was almost 50. And it means that Noah had access to all 19 of his predecessors and their knowledge of God. And Major, altho I lost my notes on it, I think Methusalah was last but that none of the Patriarchs died in the flood. I don't think I knew the meaning of his name but "old as Methusaleh" meant that he was the last of the really long lived Patriarchs.
There were 2 trees named in the garden. The tree of life, concievably was why Adam was thrown out - eating from that tree gave life - immortality, health, no aging. It is also concievable that it took 20 generations for the effects of that tree to wear off. At the time of ousting from the garden, God put a curse on the land, that was only lifted when Noah was born. The eating of meat, presumably would have come from that curse.
The Bible says that 20 generations of Patriarchs lived at the same time, and age 50 means that all the intact knowledge of God was given to Noah for the restart.
I'm still of 2 minds about demons as the "sons of God". It does sound like 2 opposites. But I don't totally buy out because of the book of enoch, and the fact is that angels can take human form. Certainly, demon possesed humans can have sex.
 
Last edited:
A problem arises in how we understand certain terms..."demons" (as we think of them in Greek and Latin folklore) are never really what God was speaking about. As you know these are simply certain orders of angels, who are actually "persons" (only normally non-corporeal), but not a separate class of creatures who were created or made to be evil ethereal tormenters...we see how consistently they will to dwell in a body all through the New Testament. The word demon was chosen because it was the word which most closely allies with the original Hebrew concept (like when choosing the Logos to imply the Memra of the Lord). In Logos we can interpret imply as the cosmic mind or logic of God whereas with the Memra of YHVH He is a specific hypostasis of YHVH Himself...fully YHVH yet in a sense separate from Him (thus with) as we see in Exodus 3 and Isaiah 48.

I think when we conclude "We can hope, we can think but we could never be positive, IF we believe that demons had sex with humans, it opens the door of demon DNA or whatever it is to be in the birth line of the Lord Jesus." It is an erroneus leap of logic. Secondly if these were spirits who were manifest IN THE FORM OF A MAN, they would have MAN DNA...non-corporeal spirits do not have DNA...so no this would not be the case.

Paul........when you say:
"It is an erroneus leap of logic. Secondly if these were spirits who were manifest IN THE FORM OF A MAN, they would have MAN DNA...non-corporeal spirits do not have DNA...so no this would not be the case".

What in the world do you base that opinion on???

Not to argue a point, I am just curious where you would come up with that conclusion.

How would we know a demon, fallen angel would have human DNA. In fact, would such a being have DNA at all. How could since it was not physical to begin with but spiritual.

Has there been some kind of scientific tests done on spirits to come to this kind of thought. You see, it seems just the opposite would be the case to me.

I still must say that when or IF one accepts the theory of fallen angels mating with humans to produce offspring, they pollute the blood line to the Messiah. There just is no way around it IMHP.
 
When you say "I simply meant that while I previously thought that the flood was called down and wiped Cain's seed from the earth" you are again making an assumption with no basis. To make this assumption one must first hold to the daughters of Cain view (in which case what happened to all the daughters of Seth) and secondly that the flood was sent to wipe out the seed of Cain only...Cain's seed was Adam's seed that same as Seth's...they were both Adam and Eve's offspring not just Seth. So the reast of the logic based on these assumptions naturally does not follow unless I accept the assumptions which I do not.

Cain's blood? We are all of one blood...we are all from the first Adam until we become "sons of God" (the phrase sons of God, in the Bible, only refer to beings created directly by God...Adam, angels, and Spirit born believers, and none else)
 
First off, I did not mean to imply that any seed or daughters of Cain, meant demonic blood. I simply meant that while I previously thought that the flood was called down and wiped Cain's seed from the earth - but always wondered if the females had cain's bloodline in the ark. With the name of Lamech, both as father to Noah, and the Lamech of Cain's line, it seems clear to me that one might well have been named after the other.
I am well aware of the theories propounded on the years, ages of the 1st Patriarchs. The Bible would relate the same year system whatever dating sysyem was used. And if you do the math, it shows that from Adam on down (thru the Seth line) that they lived until Noah was almost 50. And it means that Noah had access to all 19 of his predecessors and their knowledge of God. And Major, altho I lost my notes on it, I think Methusalah was last but that none of the Patriarchs died in the flood. I don't think I knew the meaning of his name but "old as Methusaleh" meant that he was the last of the really long lived Patriarchs.
There were 2 trees named in the garden. The tree of life, concievably was why Adam was thrown out - eating from that tree gave life - immortality, health, no aging. It is also concievable that it took 20 generations for the effects of that tree to wear off. At the time of ousting from the garden, God put a curse on the land, that was only lifted when Noah was born. The eating of meat, presumably would have come from that curse.
The Bible says that 20 generations of Patriarchs lived at the same time, and age 50 means that all the intact knowledge of God was given to Noah for the restart.
I'm still of 2 minds about demons as the "sons of God". It does sound like 2 opposites. But I don't totally buy out because of the book of enoch, and the fact is that angels can take human form. Certainly, demon possesed humans can have sex.

Silk.......I would advise that you do not place any confidance on the book of Enoch. It has been proven to have many, many errors in it and was actually irrelevant, and its Chapter 33 has actually the worst inaccuracy of all; besides the fact the book is horribly derisive against God: which derisiveness ruled it out as being FROM God, at the get-go.
 
Paul........when you say:
"It is an erroneus leap of logic. Secondly if these were spirits who were manifest IN THE FORM OF A MAN, they would have MAN DNA...non-corporeal spirits do not have DNA...so no this would not be the case".

What in the world do you base that opinion on???

spirits in a non-corporeal state do not have bodies thus no DNA, DNA is the stuff of physical life so only when they assume a body would there be DNA
 
When you say "I simply meant that while I previously thought that the flood was called down and wiped Cain's seed from the earth" you are again making an assumption with no basis. To make this assumption one must first hold to the daughters of Cain view (in which case what happened to all the daughters of Seth) and secondly that the flood was sent to wipe out the seed of Cain only...Cain's seed was Adam's seed that same as Seth's...they were both Adam and Eve's offspring not just Seth. So the reast of the logic based on these assumptions naturally does not follow unless I accept the assumptions which I do not.

Cain's blood? We are all of one blood...we are all from the first Adam until we become "sons of God" (the phrase sons of God, in the Bible, only refer to beings created directly by God...Adam, angels, and Spirit born believers, and none else)

Again, I meant only that in the flood, that previously I thought Cain's seed was wiped from the earth. I am aware that the level of evil caused the call down, if you will. I don't hold to "the daughters of Cain view" I don't even know what that entails. I agree that we are all from the line of Adam. I would be a daughter, btw - not son. Regarding DNA - both Cain and Seth would have "familial" blood. Oh, and I meant daughter of God.
 
I did not mean to imply the book of Enoch was canonical - simply literature that gives a different view. I do not have a strict opinion on nephilim but I can see both sides. We do not know, for a fact, that spirit has no mass (substance), it is out of our range of knowledge.
 
Paul........when you say:
"It is an erroneus leap of logic. Secondly if these were spirits who were manifest IN THE FORM OF A MAN, they would have MAN DNA...non-corporeal spirits do not have DNA...so no this would not be the case".

What in the world do you base that opinion on???

spirits in a non-corporeal state do not have bodies thus no DNA, DNA is the stuff of physical life so only when they assume a body would there be DNA

I have to idea Paul. Those were your words I posted and you posted them in comment #45.

I just asked were you got the information from on DNA and spirits and how a spirit assumes a body. I mean, it seems as if you know a lot about spirits and demon possession and I thought I would like to read it myself.
 
I did not mean to imply the book of Enoch was canonical - simply literature that gives a different view. I do not have a strict opinion on nephilim but I can see both sides. We do not know, for a fact, that spirit has no mass (substance), it is out of our range of knowledge.

Exactly. We simply have no idea about spirits and their function and DNA and so forth. We can read what astrologers and palm readers say, but are they the authority on such things is my question.

Seems to me that there is a whole lot of speculation going on which is exactly what I was thinking would happen.

We think, or we have heard it said or some one told us, but that is not truth. It is speculation.

I mean, think about this comment......" if these were spirits who were manifest IN THE FORM OF A MAN, they would have MAN DNA".

Really???? This is more than a stretch or leap of faith IMO. How in the world would anyone know such a thing? I have attended several schools of higher learning and I have I have run across that particular course.
 
Hey bro,

I believe that this is the first time that we have disagreed on something.

Job 1:6
"Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them".

Literally, these are divine beings or as we have grown to know them....Angels. These are not fallen or demons. They are servants that serve God's court in heaven.

Because angels are referred to as "sons of God" in Job 1; there is no correct way to extrapolate that to mean the "sons of God in Genesis 6" are those same angels or that they are demons/fallen angels.

Judges in Israel were called "sons of God" because they bore the character of God in their judging. (Gen 23:6; 30:8; Ex 15:15).

The Aramaic targum Onkelos supports the "sons of god" as being nobel men.

The Greek Symmachus translation is..."sons of the kings or lords".

Archaeology has now attested the fact through finds that a Near East king was consistently referred to as the "son of his god".

Nimrod, in Genesis was called the SUN god by the Babylonians and his son Tamuz was called the "SON of god" and he was Nimrods human son.

Gene......there is not one single verse that indicates that there are female angels my brother. Neither are there any indication of baby angels. There is just no Biblical proof.

I do not believe that there are "guardian" angels. I am one who believes that we are helped and support by the one Jesus promised us.....The Holy Spirit. Jesus did not promise guardian angels, He promised that He would send the Comforter..

As for meat eating. Man turned to eating meat because there was no crops left alive after the flood. That is why Noah took more than two of every kind, so that his family would survive until the crops planted came in.

Gene.....the problem lies in the line of the Messiah being born. IF....IF these were demons, fallen angels and they intermarried with humans and produced children, anf those children had children, sooner or later that means the blood line leading to the birth of the sinless Son of God had the blood of Satan/demons in it!!!! Do we really think that is the case?????

I know that all of us will say...NO, NO. But if we just think about it for a moment, we will, I think come to that conclusion. In fact, what other conclusion could there be?????

I wouldn't go so far as to say we disagree, but rather how we look at Scripture, I have developed a system on how I read my Bible, if what I believe the verse to be saying is true, then there won't be any other verse in the Word that contridicts it, Jesus is the Truth, not one of many truths, but if I find just one verse contradictory then what I believe the meaning of the verse to be is wrong, wouldn't you agree?

For instance, your logical conclusion about the linage of Jesus being tainted with demonic blood can be dispelled by reading Gen 6:9, Noah's blood line was without blemish, another flaw is what you are saying makes God a little god, impotant, unable to keep the royal line pure, now if I remember correctly I've read some where on another thread, you said God was able to keep His Word pure and correct for us through all of the ages, ...6000 years now, so, since He asked Abraham, "Is there anything too difficult for me?" why couldn't He keep the bloodline of Noah pure? You see what I'm getting at?

As for the Anakim after the Flood it's simple, one of Noah's daughter's-in-law had tainted blood, but she was not the wife of Seth.

This laptop is so slow, so I'll let you do the foot work if you are interested, I got the magazine wrong, it was Life, but here is factual evidence from two Christian brothers that demons are interested in women, way back when I read a few excerpts from the story and it tells us she was locked up in isolation with 24 hour gaurds watching, she was examined by medical doctors and she had been raped ,and finally when McAllister and Sumrall delievered her they found a nonhuman hair tightly clutched in her fist, so here are a couple of paragraphs from Yahoo answers about the incident;

Demon possession;

Perhaps one of the most classic experiences, that of the girl whose name was Clarissa who back in 1947, there in the Philippines had the unusual phenomenon of going into these fits where, when she would come out of them would have these bite marks all over her body. Places where it was impossible for her to bite herself; on the back of the shoulder, upon the back of her neck and all, and blood would be drawn. They put her in the Bellevue Prison there for her own protection. And the greatest psychiatrists of the Philippines were brought by the mayor of Manila to psychoanalyze and to find out what was going on. And they came up with, you know, no explanation and no help.

Finally they called for a couple of missionaries; Bob McAllister and Lester Sumrall. And Lester Sumrall has written a book entitled "Bitten by Demons" of the story of Clarissa. Actually Life Magazine got hold of the thing and did a special on it, showing pictures of her and all, of these bite marks on her. And it was quite an interesting thing to the world of psychology and all at that time. But nonetheless, through the ministry of Bob McAllister and Lester Sumrall the girl was delivered from these demons and Clarissa accepted Jesus Christ. And it's quite an interesting story; it's one that you don't want to read before you go to bed.


Because angels are referred to as "sons of God" in Job 1; there is no correct way to extrapolate that to mean the "sons of God in Genesis 6" are those same angels or that they are demons/fallen angels.

I believe Scripture illuminates that for us, in Job 38:7 God calls the Angels Sons of God, when He created the earth they were watching, so that had to be before the fall of Lucifer because Rev 2:13 tells us Satan's throne is here on earth, so Satan didn't have a sanctuary yet to place his throne in so that he coulod defile it with his merchandising Eze 28:18, as I have already said Jude and Peter refer to demons that didn't keep their proper abode and are now imprisoned in the Abussos, there are just too many verses that speak of this subject, and besides, like I said, Seth's and Cain's kids are still having children today so where are the giants they are producing?

Bro, maybe you don't believe in guardian angels, maybe because of the different places we live and the different lives we have lived, but I know there has to be guardian angels protecting me, this place is so demonic and dark you wouldn't believe it and if there weren't angels protecting me I would of been dead long ago, first let me explain how I know there are demons, as a teenager I took a lot of LSD (drugs are just a door into the deminsion where they live, when on drugs we open that door and allow them into our deminsion), we had spirit guides (their ultimate goal was to kill us), on drugs we saw them, we talked with them, we believed what they said and when in the presence of a demon, there is a foul stench, there is a coldness like being in a freezer and they don't like bright light, I have experienced those same things here, for instance, tourists walking on a hot, glowing red bed of coals and not having their feet burned Pro 6:28, as the witch, and he calls himself a witch, was doing his incantations, when the demonic force comes through the door, there is a shift in the air (time-space continium?) that you can see and feel, the same as when we were coming on to the LSD, and the tourists sense it, they shudder and pull their shirt, blouse, light jackets, around them, because it's cold, then when I first came here I boldly walked into the Mormon Temple in searchof a English-Tahitian dictionary, same thing, and I was quickly and rudely escorted outside, I could give you more instances, but the point I want to make is one day Father told me to stop going to these kind of places and in my heart I felt-heard, "think about your angels," ...now I know've said some things that are probably foreign to you, but remember, we both agree on the foundational principles of salvation, it's just Father has different roads for us to walk suited to our individual characters.

Blessings,

Gene
 
I have to idea Paul. Those were your words I posted and you posted them in comment #45.

I just asked were you got the information from on DNA and spirits and how a spirit assumes a body. I mean, it seems as if you know a lot about spirits and demon possession and I thought I would like to read it myself.

As for information on DNA I am a Clinical Trial Assistant by trade, trained in Biochemistry...

As for information that demonstrates spirit beings can become manifest in the flesh, I got that from all through the Bible...Gabriel for example appears to Daniel twice as a man...YHVH (I believe the Son, because Jesus tells us no man has ever seen the Father or ever heard His voice) also appears as a man to Joshua, Jacob, Manoah and his wife, etc.)...an angel appears as a man in Judges 19...two who are sent by YHVH in the tent of Abraham (also in the form of a man) to reign fire and brimstone down upon them from YHVH in heaven...all the malevolent spirits in the New Testament possess (control or indwell) people and even some pigs, and so on...

HOW a spirit can assume or manifest in a physical form or take one over, I cannot speak as to the details...

Some (like most Calvinists) believe it is only if God wills them to

Others (like RCCs, EOs, and Arminians) would say certain orders of angels have free will (like what we call Arch-Angels...like Gabriel, and the one we call Satan...who also have free will, thus the ability to rebel), Therefore some may be able to manifest into a flesh form of their own will (similar to our glorified bodies after the resurrection), others like the Seraphim are created with unalterable purpose and cannot step outside their realm.

However do not confuse ability with desire...I may desire to kill someone and drink their blood and I am certainly capable but the very thought (even mentioning it here) repels me and I would never ever do such a thing...I find it vile and ultimately depraved...someone else may live for it. Such is the nature of free will beings...one yields to the higher pullings of the Spirit and another to the beastial pullings of the flesh (with a whole spectrum of degrees of possibility in between)

In His love

brother Paul
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I forgot,

Gene......there is not one single verse that indicates that there are female angels my brother. Neither are there any indication of baby angels. There is just no Biblical proof.

Sorry bro, but there is,

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in Heaven. Mat 22:30

The word as indicates this statement by the Lord is a simile, so He is comparing the angels to men and women, also the words He used give us the meaning, marry is a reference to the man and given in marriage is a refferenc to the woman (look it up in your Strong's), it would be ludicrous for Jesus to use the Angels as examples if they were sexless or without reproductive organs if it was-is like you say, also, if we follow your logic about Angels, then when we are in Heaven, all of our precious sisters will become sexless men, ...can you really believe that?

Just think about it, this is in the Bible, numerous times, God is Holy and pure, in light of that, do you really think He wouldn't create female angels to watch over women, that just goes against human nature, you being a father, would you allow a man to watch your grils during their private moments, of course not, so how can you think you are more moral than Father God, ...so how 'bout it ladies, what do you think about male Angels watching you every moment of your lives?

Blessings,

Gene
 
Last edited:
Just passing through...I have experienced them myself (as have millions though the ages)...I see so-called Christians who claim there are no real malevolent spirits as non-born from above make-believers who have joined the club of Churchianity. Jesus says they are real...He is either Lord and Creator (and thus is not lying, being deceived, or being superstitious) or He isn't the Lord and materialists and modern skeptics know more than He does...
 
I don't agree, Major, that the discussion has become alarming. I would say, informative. I post and keep posting, when I feel I have been misunderstood. There are many bad paths I could have followed, if God had not given me some protection, in whatever form. Someone once said there are flocks of angels around each believer. It's comforting to think so. Having done much research into the demonic and having had some personal history, I can say (minus the Mormon Temple thing) that much of what Gene speaks of is IMO valid. But that doesn't mean I agree about the nephilim issue. I don't know. They say the "giant" translation is not in keeping with real giant giants. As far as I know, no giant bones have ever been unearthed, altho I did hear a few years ago? they thought they might have found Goliath's tomb (but it turned out to be just his name -no bones).
I know you don't like the book of Enoch, but it says there that Angels were put in charge of watching over humanity, and instead decided to mate with human women against God's word. They hoped that Enoch would intercede with God for them, to save their children.
 
Sorry, I forgot,



Sorry bro, but there is,

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in Heaven. Mat 22:30

The word as indicates this statement by the Lord is a simile, so He is comparing the angels to men and women, also the words He used give us the meaning, marry is a reference to the man and given in marriage is a refferenc to the woman (look it up in your Strong's), it would be ludicrous for Jesus to use the Angels as examples if they were sexless or without reproductive organs if it was-is like you say, also, if we follow your logic about Angels, then when we are in Heaven, all of our precious sisters will become sexless men, ...can you really believe that?

Just think about it, this is in the Bible, numerous times, God is Holy and pure, in light of that, do you really think He wouldn't create female angels to watch over women, that just goes against human nature, you being a father, would you allow a man to watch your grils during their private moments, of course not, so how can you think you are more moral than Father God, ...so how 'bout it ladies, what do you think about male Angels watching you every moment of your lives?

Blessings,

Gene

Some classes of angels in their spirit form may be genderless...maleness and femaleness may only be requisite on physical beings for pre-creation...

In heaven, I believe in the manifest presence of God, we are fulfilled...we have the mind of Christ, fulness of joy, knowing even as we are known, etc. In such a state of existence, I believe the flesh has no significance as a drawing power over us...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top