Thanks
A king abdicates his throne for another to assume the power. We as Christians are to die daily to the will of the Lord. I chose "abdicate" to remind me of my duty to die daily.
Considerations Of Genesis 6:1-4
- Thread starter Brother Paul
- Start date
- Status
Thanks
A king abdicates his throne for another to assume the power. We as Christians are to die daily to the will of the Lord. I chose "abdicate" to remind me of my duty to die daily.
Actually it is in the scriptures, but you've chosen to ignore them. Up until modern times, that was the normal understanding. The more we mess with genetics the more it makes sense. Bad men and good women make a giant not.
WHYNOT???????? Because it is NOT in the Word of God abdicate.
What common knowledge???? Speculation, thoughts, dreams, opinions, and wishs are not the truth my friend.
The only truth in this world is what God says is truth. At least that is what the Bible does say.
I believe and say that TRUTH is REALITY.
Thanks
A king abdicates his throne for another to assume the power. We as Christians are to die daily to the will of the Lord. I chose "abdicate" to remind me of my duty to die daily.
Now that is a comment I can wholeheartly agree with!
Where in the Scriptures is it found my friend and please tell me....what is the age of "Enlightenment"???
Bad men and bad women make another human being my friend.
Genesis 1:25
"And God made the beast of the earth after his kind and every cattle after his kind and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and God saw that it was good".
In other words....a bad chicken and a good chicken make another chicken.
A bad dog and another bad dog make a another dog.
A good cat and a bad cat make another cat.
Last edited:
Thanks Major. It is not a matter of "believing" the Book of Enoch (particularly in view of my not having read the book, prior to Sunday) - with all biblical literature, I read it, not necessarily accepting what other men have left out, sometimes for political rationales. There are many theorizing that both Jesus and the Baptist, may have had close ties to Qumran. I was watching some docmentary (on the Military channel) where a few talking heads said that a dead sea scroll "very close" lists the beatitudes, and they have a copy of James, brother of Jesus, a letter that is almost word for word that is written to a ruler, outside Israel, that is listed in Acts. (Going from memory here). Except the ruler is different than the one (persons) referred to in Acts. I looked it up at the time. And there is a copy of Enoch, which would speak to the Essenes feeling it was canon.
Having said that, I'm not sure I want to defend the Book of Enoch. Regarding the Watchers - angels, (Lucifer, fell before the Garden). The watchers fell later. Azazel is the only name I recognize listed as a demon, false God, in scripture. For your #1, Lucifer was cast from Heaven due to pride/arrogance and so Heaven, as it stands, would not have that changed. #2 - 200 angels listed does not make me throw it out. Are you positive God only uses Angels as messengers only? #3 is pretty big in my book. For the first time I see that long before Revelations was written, we have a precedent, in Enoch, a warning not to twist the words. That has some echo with me. #4 - I think the mortal dead have a voice with God, and Rev. speaks to the martyr's dead and saints. In Gen. God says Abel's bloods cry out from the ground (paraphrase). #6- I think God has restrained angels in the past. Again - level of understanding, may be in play. I'm not sure what you are saying here about the length of days. We are given to understand that scripturally that Enoch "walked" with God and was seen no more after age 365? The Book claims he was brought back to relay what he learned at 550? (memory). Is that what you mean?
But I have other concerns with the book that discount it for me. I don't like his souls perishing. Heaven , by it's very concept would always be sin free. He makes no room for those who have sinned being forgiven. I have problems with the meaning of the cow sequence.
Silk, you said..........
" For the first time I see that long before Revelations was written, we have a precedent, in Enoch, a warning not to twist the words."
The precedent was NOT with Enoch in not twisting words but is found in Deuteronomy 4:2.
Then, I am glad to see that you have rejected this book. I can not stress how important that is IF you are wanting to learn and live by the Word of God!
Then you asked..........
"We are given to understand that scripturally that Enoch "walked" with God and was seen no more after age 365? The Book claims he was brought back to relay what he learned at 550? (memory). Is that what you mean?
No. I do not have the understanding that he was brought back.I really do not know what several of the other guys were referring to about days and years and so on. All I know is what the Bible says.
Genesis 5:23-24
"And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years; and Enoch walked with God and he was not, for God took him".
Enoch then lived 365 years. Some people believe that Enoch and Elijah are the two witnesses in the Revelation that preach from the Temple because they did not die but were translated. I do not accept that because if that is the case, what do we do with all of the believers who are Raptured and do not die.
Abdicate. Please understand that it is not accepted to make a claim and then back off from that claim by saying "I shan't get into a debate about where giants come from".
That is just not the way it works. YOU made the claim, not you must produce the proof.
No one is saying that "giants" were not present in the days of the Old Testament and even so today. That is not the issue. The question is...........were those giants the children of the mating between demons, "sons of god" (fallen angels) and human women who are called the "daughters of men"?
Now as for the long post where you did list Scriptures, not one single Scripture you posted spoke to the question at hand. Are those giants the offspring of sexual contact between demons and human women???????
That is the Scripture that needs to be posted and debated my friend.
Again I ask.........what is this "age of enlightenment".???
Yes, there were large human beings. Still are today. But did they come from this sexual contact with human women. That is the question.
Major, (grin) well, cough, if the Book of Enoch were true, it would have been written before, Deuteronomy, but still, I stand corrected. And you know I don't accept the rapture (altho I pray it is true). And as was prophesized, Elijah came back, according to scripture as the Baptist, making the way for Christ (Matt 17:11).
Silk, "PHANUEL" is NOT a misspelling of the name IMMANUEL.
He was said to be an arch angel in the Apocrypha but he is no where to be found in the Bible itself.
I was being cute, playing on Phanuel and Immanuel - point was I agreed. I'm waiting for someone to mention Gabriel as an angel of scripture.
Silk, to believe that John the Baptist was Elijah means you believe in re-incarnation. Now there is no other way to look at it than that.
Now, may I say to you that the Angel Gabriel announced to Zecharias that his son's name would be called John in Luke 1:13. He goes on to say in verse 15 that he will be great in the sight of the Lord and “shall drink no wine or strong drink and will be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother's womb.” Verse 17 says of John, “he will also go before Him (The Lord) IN THE SPIRIT AND POWER OF ELIJAH,” which is a ministry of reconciliation, would have the “hearts of the fathers turned to the children and children turning to their fathers.”
Notice that the Scriptures do not say that John the Baptist is Elijah, only that he comes in the spirit and power of Elijah.
To claim that Elijah is John the Baptist is to teach reincarnation. The premise is that a spirit in a former body comes back to be born in another body. At the very least, it is transmigration. The Bible has never taught this and does not teach it now. The Bible teaches resurrection not re-incarnation.
Lets prove it. In Matthew 11:13, Jesus states: “For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.”
(Jesus calls him “John” not “Elijah.”)
Elijah is included with 'all the prophets' who came before John. In verse 14, Jesus says “and if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come.” John wore a garment of camel's hair and a leather belt and preached in the wilderness. This was the same attire that Elijah wore (2 Kings 1:8), bringing attention to the Jews of the similarity of John's mission to that of Elijah's. Prophecy has many patterns and sometime dual or more fulfillments.
Malachi had predicted that before the Messiah's appearing, Elijah would come as a forerunner (Mal. 4:5-in relation to the day of the Lord). If the people had been willing to receive Jesus as the Messiah, then John would have filled the role of Elijah. Jesus then tells them to heed His words. If John fulfills Elijah's coming then Jesus is the Messiah.
Jesus pointed to John the Baptist as a type of fulfillment of Elijah's coming but he was not a reincarnation.
This is proven in John 1:20 when the Jews sent out the priests and Levites to investigate John's ministry. They ask him if he is the Christ. He states emphatically “No!” They ask him again if he is Elijah, John answers “I am not.” This is not a temporary memory loss for John that Jesus has to correct later. In verse 25, John the Baptist is asked, ‘Why do you baptize if you are not the Christ nor Elijah nor the prophet?’ In verses 25-27 John points to the Messiah who is coming after him. He states that it is he who is the forerunner of Malachi 3:1. In Luke 1:76, we see that John's father, Zecharias, is filled with the Holy spirit and says that his child will be called the prophet of the highest and will “go before the face of the Lord and prepare His ways again.' This relates John's ministry to Mal. 3:1, 4:5, and Luke 1:17. John labored in the same Spirit and power of the former prophet by calling people to repentance and he was preparing them for the salvation that Christ would later bring.
I am so sorry. Please forgive me.
Now I said that Gabriel is NOT called an arch angel in the Bible. Yes, I thought someone would have challenged that already too.
OK...........I can do that. You will not like it but what the heck.
You said...............
"Society is being groomed for alien (demonic) invasion. Look at all the movies these days geared towards either making man stronger or better, being saved from extinction or flat out being invaded. The only aliens are demons."
I must reject your opinion. That my friend is nuts, it is not Biblical in way whatsoever and it smacks of the religion of NEW AGE and
the conspiracy agenda.
Personally I deal only with the Word of God as the TRUTH an It appears that you have totally rejected the Word of God and have proceeded to climb out on a limb that is destined to break off.
That makes it look like you are "ABDICATEING" your responsibility to explain your claims without providing any documentation or proof.
Major - Jesus said John was Elijah as foretold. I am very careful, both before and now, to accede that John may be a one of a kind case, and I have no ax to grind regarding re-incarnation - I lean towards it from personal knowledge but as far as I am concerned, this is the only life I know I have. I have no wish to imagining days of old when I was Cleo (kidding).
Ouch Major. For the record, I agree with Abdicate in that aliens are evil/demonic. There is trendy discussions, that aliens created us and I know they did not. Actually, all Christians and Jews should know this basic tenet. Unlike the Rapture, I pray that the invasion of evil not take place.
- Status