Angels

[CoreIssue]

What angels are and what they do. Also what they are not.

Angels is one of those areas many do not consider important to study. While true there are more important issues to learn and understand initially it is hardly an unimportant area. Angels play and active role in events on the earth and especially in the daily lives of the saints.

So, what is an angel?

ANGEL
Strong's Number: 32
Original Word: aggelo
Transliterated Word: Aggelos
Phonetic Spelling: ang'-el-os
Parts of Speech : Noun Masculine
Definition:

a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from God So, angel does not mean a specific class of being as many think. It does not equate to being human, in example, as meaning a distinct type of being. It refers to a job or office description or a general description.

Here are verses where aggelos is used to refer to humans and even agents of Satan.
Matthew 11: (NIV)
10"This is the one about whom it is written, 'Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, Who will prepare Your way before You.'

2 Corinthians 12: (NIV)
7And because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me-- to keep me from exalting myself!
James 2: (NIV)
25And in the same way was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works, when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
Yet, we never told a specific name, as in such as human being to call them. So, the descriptive angel is used.

Using the term angel we will proceed in our study of what that specific group is, and is not. There are more errors and misconceptions that are common and have been common for centuries.

An angel is a spirit being and such do not have flesh.
Hebrews 1: (NIV)
14Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?
Luke 24: (NIV)
39 "(1) See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; (2) touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."
SPIRIT
Strong's Number: 4151
Original Word: pneuma
Transliterated Word: Pneuma
Phonetic Spelling: pnyoo'-mah
Parts of Speech : Noun Neuter
Definition:

the third person of the triune God, the Holy Spirit, coequal, coeternal with the Father and the Son
sometimes referred to in a way which emphasises his personality and character (the Holy Spirit)
sometimes referred to in a way which emphasises his work and power (the Spirit of Truth)
never referred to as a depersonalised force
the spirit, i.e. the vital principal by which the body is animated


the rational spirit, the power by which the human being feels, thinks, decides
the soul
a spirit, i.e. a simple essence, devoid of all or at least all grosser matter, and possessed of the power of knowing, desiring, deciding, and acting


a life giving spirit
a human soul that has left the body
a spirit higher than man but lower than God, i.e. an angel
used of demons, or evil spirits, who were conceived as inhabiting the bodies of men
the spiritual nature of Christ, higher than the highest angels and equal to God, the divine nature of Christ

the disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of any one


the efficient source of any power, affection, emotion, desire, etc.
a movement of air (a gentle blast)


of the wind, hence the wind itself
breath of nostrils or mouth

And here is good place to deal with a very common error that has become accepted by doctrinal teaching and not through actual study. That being the Nephilim issue of Genesis.
Genesis 6: (NIV)
4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days-and also afterward-when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

Far too may accept the Nephilim were offspring of angels marrying women. This is not only completely non biblical but also illogical.

This verse does not say Nephilim were born to these marriages. Nor would it matter if they did.

The common rationale is that sons of God means angels. And that is completely erroneous. Most linguists will tell you this term is vague and this verse does not uphold that interpretation.

And when you look at the New Testament you find sons of God applies to saints as well as angels. So linguistically it is commonly held to simply mean those in relationship with God. No more and no less.

Further, there were Nephilim after the Flood. So these angels came back and did it again? Or another batch rebelled and repeated the old error?

Numbers 13: (NIV)
33We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."
Also angels are spirits and were created as a company. They are not male or female to start with. They do not marry or reproduce.
Matthew 22: (NIV)
30At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
And any such reproduction would be a new race of beings. And every initial reproduction would be a separate race. So each race would need a blood sacrifice such as Christ did for us to give the offspring a chance at salvation.

Consider that even if they were male and female why would they want human women? An angelic female would be bounds above such. And being spirit could become any shape her mate would desire. Plus if they were male and female they would be reproducing in Heaven. Isn’t that the purpose of the sexes? But that just isn’t happening due to the issues of race and so on.

Further, God determined each kind would produce its own kind. Angels are not human so they cannot reproduce with humans. Nor can they even create the life necessary to reproduce, meaning the sperm required. And even if they could create sperm it would be spirit, not flesh, so it could not impregnate a flesh and blood human woman.

Also, it is said these are the angels that rebel. But that is not plausible unless one believes in at least four separate rebellions in Heaven. But the Bible never speaks of more than one.
The proof of this is Satan rebelled before the 6 days of creation. He was already fallen when he tempted Eve.
Luke 10: (NIV)
18 And He said to them, "I was watching (1) Satan fall from heaven like lightning.
This is past tense. Yes, he was allowed back in Heaven to be the Accuser but here he was cast down after losing his position in Heaven. And along with him the third of the angels that rebelled with him.
Jude 1: (NIV)
6 And (1) angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has (2) kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day,

Clearly, the angels that rebelled with him are bound until the White Throne Judgment. They will not be released again for a future war. They were not released to sire the Nephilim.

Therefore, if the Nephilim were sired by fallen angels that means a second group rebelled. And then with the time of Goliath a third. Then another group for the proposed war in Heaven in Revelation 12.

But there is no war in Revelation 12 in the future. It historical as is the reference to the past birth of Christ.

There are two passages in that chapter. The first deals with history and the second with the Tribulation Period. There is no birth in the second passage or any war. Only Satan is cast down in the second. He is the falling star given the authority to open the Pit. And this passage is indeed part of the 5th Trumpet which is the First Woe at Mid Tribulation.

So, the war was long ago, Satan was cast from his position then along with the third of the angels that rebelled with him. He became the tempter of Adam and Eve and the Accuser of the saints before the throne afterwards. The other fallen angels have been and are bound in caves of darkness until Judgment.

So they are not demons. No where are fallen angels ever called demons. No where are demons ever called fallen angels.

And it is illogical that a fallen angel would even desire to posses a human. They are complete beings in and of themselves.

But it would be logical for non-human beings that once had flesh to desire to take on flesh again. They actually would be functional in it. After all, as spirits they are incomplete as the deceased saints are incomplete until they receive their glorified bodies.

But that is another subject.

Moving on to the so-called classes of angels in the same context of angels being a specific type of being. Here we are talking about the Seraphim, Cherubim, Archangels, Thrones, Dominions, Virtues, Powers, and Principalities.

Totally non-Biblical concept. First, let us split off Seraphim, Cherubim and Archangels and look at the rest. These are in reference to earthly governments. And the earthly governments while appointed by God are under the authority of Satan.

When Adam fell his God given authority over the earth went to Satan. And while Christ has paid the redemption price he has not yet reclaimed the earth. And will not do so until the Second Coming.

So in spiritual context we are talking about the spirits behind or ruling through the governments of the world and other authorities. Therefore if angels they would be fallen angels.

But it has already been shown the fallen angels are not roaming the earth. They are chained in prison. So they cannot be these powers referred to.

So, these powers, positions, and titles belong to demons, not fallen angels. This again shows such words are dealing with titles and job descriptions and not types of beings.

To further prove the point let us look at Cherubim next. Cherubim are not a class of being. It simply is a title used to refer to being a guardian. Let us look at the uses of Cherubim in the Bible.
Genesis 3: (NIV)
24After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side [ 3:24 Or [ placed in front ] ] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
Exodus 25: (NIV)
18And make two cherubim out of hammered gold at the ends of the cover.
Isaiah 37: (NIV)
16"O LORD Almighty, God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim, you alone are God over all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth.
Ezekiel 10: (NIV)
1 I looked, and I saw the likeness of a throne of sapphire [1] above the expanse that was over the heads of the cherubim. 2 The LORD said to the man clothed in linen, "Go in among the wheels beneath the cherubim. Fill your hands with burning coals from among the cherubim and scatter them over the city." And as I watched, he went in.
3 Now the cherubim were standing on the south side of the temple when the man went in, and a cloud filled the inner court. 4 Then the glory of the LORD rose from above the cherubim and moved to the threshold of the temple. The cloud filled the temple, and the court was full of the radiance of the glory of the LORD . 5 The sound of the wings of the cherubim could be heard as far away as the outer court, like the voice of God Almighty [2] when he speaks.
6 When the LORD commanded the man in linen, "Take fire from among the wheels, from among the cherubim," the man went in and stood beside a wheel. 7 Then one of the cherubim reached out his hand to the fire that was among them. He took up some of it and put it into the hands of the man in linen, who took it and went out. 8 (Under the wings of the cherubim could be seen what looked like the hands of a man.)
9 I looked, and I saw beside the cherubim four wheels, one beside each of the cherubim; the wheels sparkled like chrysolite. 10 As for their appearance, the four of them looked alike; each was like a wheel intersecting a wheel. 11 As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the cherubim faced; the wheels did not turn about [3] as the cherubim went. The cherubim went in whatever direction the head faced, without turning as they went. 12 Their entire bodies, including their backs, their hands and their wings, were completely full of eyes, as were their four wheels. 13 I heard the wheels being called "the whirling wheels." 14 Each of the cherubim had four faces: One face was that of a cherub, the second the face of a man, the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.
15 Then the cherubim rose upward. These were the living creatures I had seen by the Kebar River. 16 When the cherubim moved, the wheels beside them moved; and when the cherubim spread their wings to rise from the ground, the wheels did not leave their side. 17 When the cherubim stood still, they also stood still; and when the cherubim rose, they rose with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in them.
18 Then the glory of the LORD departed from over the threshold of the temple and stopped above the cherubim. 19 While I watched, the cherubim spread their wings and rose from the ground, and as they went, the wheels went with them. They stopped at the entrance to the east gate of the LORD 's house, and the glory of the God of Israel was above them.
20 These were the living creatures I had seen beneath the God of Israel by the Kebar River, and I realized that they were cherubim. 21 Each had four faces and four wings, and under their wings was what looked like the hands of a man. 22 Their faces had the same appearance as those I had seen by the Kebar River. Each one went straight ahead.

Revelation 4: (NIV)
8Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come."

Ezekiel 28: (NIV)
14"You were the (1) anointed cherub who covers,
And I placed you there.
You were on the holy (2) mountain of God;
You walked in the midst of the (3) stones of fire.

So what do all these verses have in common? All are guard positions.

And look at Satan. He as annointed, not created, as a Cherub. Plus he was the supreme angel over all others before he fell. And are not such called Archangels, not Cherubs?

Finally, look at the four Cherubs of the throne of God. They are defined as Four Living Beings. This is the same words used to refer to flesh life in the Bible. No other Heavenly Being is ever called this. That means they are flesh and blood. So no way by any stretch of the imagination can they be angels in the classical use of the word.

And Cherub is used in the context of functionality rather than being.

Look at the definitions.

LIVING
Strong's Number: 02416
Original Word: yx
Transliterated Word: Chay
Phonetic Spelling: khah'-ee
Parts of Speech : N/A
Definition:

living, alive
green (of vegetation)
flowing, fresh (of water)
lively, active (of man)
reviving (of the springtime) n m
relatives

life (abstract emphatic)


life
sustenance, maintenance n f
living thing, animal


animal
life
appetite
revival, renewal
communityCHERUB
Strong's Number: 03742
Original Word: bwrk
Transliterated Word: K@ruwb
Phonetic Spelling: ker-oob'
Parts of Speech : Noun Masculine
Definition:

cherub, cherubim (pl)

an angelic being

as guardians of Eden

as flanking God's throne

as an image form hovering over the Ark of the Covenant

as the chariot of Jehovah (fig.)
Strong's Number: 03742 Original Word: bwrk Transliterated Word: K@ruwb Phonetic Spelling: ker-oob' Parts of Speech : Noun Masculine Definition:
So, again we find the realities we live with spiritually are far more complex than many think or believe. But perfectly in keeping and logical from a Biblical point of view.

[MHz]

Hi Core,
Instead of the usual line-by-line reply perhaps this can be a way of keeping the focus on who the 'sons of God' are in Ge:6.

In the below there seem to be three seperate 'groups', 'men', daughters (of men), and 'sons of God'. That marriages were taking place between men and women would seem to be after Adam and Eve's offspring had families in that it is men, not man (singular).
While it is true Adam is referenced as a 'son of God' that was before his sin. It is also true men are called 'sons of God' in the NT.
In the OT they were always called 'sons of man' or 'sons of men'.
In the OT 'sons of God' refer to un-fallen Angels as in Job.
If all of Adams children were born into sin then they would never be referenced as being 'sons of God', that is a title reserved for those who are in good standing with God, not sinners. That these are called 'sons of God' would also mean that these Angels had not yet done anything to be classified as fallen. Taking wives from the daughters of men would certainly change that. It also mentions they took (many) wives, as many as they wanted. Noah was righteous and he and his sons had one wife each.

The giants mentioned are not the children of Angels and daughters of men, they are the Angels, the children of these two would be the mighty men of renown.
Now it also says and after that, but it does not say right after that. That time could be as far away as the book of Revelations.

Ge:6:1:
And it came to pass,
when men began to multiply on the face of the earth,
and daughters were born unto them,
Ge:6:2:
That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair;
and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Ge:6:3:
And the LORD said,
My spirit shall not always strive with man,
for that he also is flesh:
yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Ge:6:4:
There were giants in the earth in those days;
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 mighty men which were of old,
men of renown.

If the flood was the cause of death for all flesh (including the men of renown);

Ge:6:7:
And the LORD said,
I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth;
both man,
and beast,
and the creeping thing,
and the fowls of the air;
for it repenteth me that I have made them.

What is Jude referencing;

Jude:1:14:
And Enoch also,
the seventh from Adam,
prophesied of these,
saying,
Behold,
the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Jude:1:15:
To execute judgment upon all,
and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed,
and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
Jude:1:16:
These are murmurers,
complainers,
walking after their own lusts;
and their mouth speaketh great swelling words,
having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

Enoch's prophecy was for these 'sons of God', the flood would not take care of these because they cannot die, but 10,000 Holy Angels could certainly bind them in chains in a pit where could no longer do the ungodly things they had been doing.

This link also hints that 'sons of God' are Angels,

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1/1154917370-5086.html

Eze:28:13:
Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God;
every precious stone was thy covering,
the sardius,
topaz,
and the diamond,
the beryl,
the onyx,
and the jasper,
the sapphire,
the emerald,
and the carbuncle,
and gold:
the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

(It doesn't appear he has fallen in the above verse and that is in Eden after Adam was there for there was no trees or grass ect according to Ge:2 before Adam was alive)

Eze:28:14:
Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so:
thou wast upon the holy mountain of God;
thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

(Holy Mountain is most likely in Heaven, and he was certainly there and in good standing before his sin. Stones of fire could be objects like our sun or lava if this is on Earth)

Eze:28:15:
Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created,
till iniquity was found in thee.

(Perfect from the moment of his creation untill he sinned)

Eze:28:16:
By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence,
and thou hast sinned:
therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God:
and I will destroy thee,
O covering cherub,
from the midst of the stones of fire.
((The first violence he did was to cause the death of Adam and Eve(getting her to eat from the tree) and he lied (by telling her she would not die, the opposite of what God told Adam). This also foretells his fate and it points more to the earth being the stone of fire (molten core) than stars.))

Eze:28:17:
Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness:
I will cast thee to the ground,
I will lay thee before kings,
that they may behold thee.

(Probably best covered by these verses;
Isa:14:15:
Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell,
to the sides of the pit.
Isa:14:16:
They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee,
and consider thee,
saying,
Is this the man that made the earth to tremble,
that did shake kingdoms;
Isa:14:17:
That made the world as a wilderness,
and destroyed the cities thereof;
that opened not the house of his prisoners?
Isa:14:18:
All the kings of the nations,
even all of them,
lie in glory,
every one in his own house.

I will cover this whole passage after I finish this one)

Eze:28:18:
Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities,
by the iniquity of thy traffick;
therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee,
it shall devour thee,
and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

(This is the end of his little season, the all that behold this will be the people who have been with Christ for the thousand years, whether they see it from the earth or from this verse isn't important, that they will see it is important though;
Isa:51:6:
Lift up your eyes to the heavens,
and look upon the earth beneath:
for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke,
and the earth shall wax old like a garment,
and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner:
but my salvation shall be for ever,
and my righteousness shall not be abolished.)


Eze:28:19:
All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee:
thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

(Probably the little season as that is when he leaves for the Lake.)

Isa:14:4:
That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon,
and say,
How hath the oppressor ceased!
the golden city ceased!

(Again Satan most likely even though the beast is the 8th king it is only through Satan that the beast has 'kingly power', the two are in agreement not at war with each other. Babylon is destroyed by this time)

Isa:14:5:
The LORD hath broken the staff of the wicked,
and the sceptre of the rulers.

(Wicked men and Satan's seat of power is broken.
((I've never thought of the image being a scepter before now, but it is though to keep in mind)), it should include the armies of the nations and the 200 million and the remnant)

Isa:14:6:
He who smote the people in wrath with a continual stroke,
he that ruled the nations in anger,
is persecuted,
and none hindereth.

(All those meant to die are now dead)

Isa:14:7:
The whole earth is at rest,
and is quiet:
they break forth into singing.

(Resurrection is probably complete, for Israel and those from the nations who will be alive for the thousand years)

Isa:14:8:
Yea,
the fir trees rejoice at thee,
and the cedars of Lebanon,
saying,
Since thou art laid down,
no feller is come up against us.

(Even the trees are safe)

Isa:14:9:
Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming:
it stirreth up the dead for thee,
even all the chief ones of the earth;
it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.

(Satan being chained, Christ uses the key to hell that he has to open it)

Isa:14:10:
All they shall speak and say unto thee,
Art thou also become weak as we?
art thou become like unto us?

(The men who will be in hell for the thousand years will see satan being chained)

Isa:14:11:
Thy pomp is brought down to the grave,
and the noise of thy viols:
the worm is spread under thee,
and the worms cover thee.

(The pit)

Isa:14:12:
How art thou fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer,
son of the morning!
how art thou cut down to the ground,
which didst weaken the nations!

(A description of just how far he did fall, a complete fall. Now how did he weaken the nations? Before the flood his followers certainly didn't help man by introducing all the violence, but there is no mention of nations untill after the flood. The incident at the tower of bable certainly weaken the nations, they had one language before and couldn't understand each other after, that certainly weakened men as to their ability to do things together.)

Isa:14:13:
For thou hast said in thine heart,
I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God:
I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation,
in the sides of the north:

(Now he seems to be on Earth when he is thinking this, if in Heaven you cannot ascend to there, you are already there. Again the tower of bable was being built for this very purpose. Once there his throne (as king of the Earth after his fall it is proper he has a throne), he also seems to have aspiration to be on the roof of the Holy City that is even now still in Heaven. I'm not sure about this last part but it could be a direction based in Heaven)

Isa:14:14:
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will be like the most High.

(Certainly seems like he is below our clouds, that our clouds are;
Na:1:3:
The LORD is slow to anger,
and great in power,
and will not at all acquit the wicked:
the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm,
and the clouds are the dust of his feet.

might be part of his desire to be above the clouds)

Isa:14:15:
Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell,
to the sides of the pit.

(Sides, not the very bottom which is where the men thatcan see him will be)

Isa:14:16:
They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee,
and consider thee,
saying,
Is this the man that made the earth to tremble,
that did shake kingdoms;

(No explanation needed for this and a few more after this one))

Isa:14:17:
That made the world as a wilderness,
and destroyed the cities thereof;
that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Isa:14:18:
All the kings of the nations,
even all of them,
lie in glory,
every one in his own house.

Isa:14:19:
But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch,
and as the raiment of those that are slain,
thrust through with a sword,
that go down to the stones of the pit;
as a carcase trodden under feet.

Isa:14:20:
Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial,
because thou hast destroyed thy land,
and slain thy people:
the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.

(Now this might refer to the mighty men of renown)

Isa:14:21:
Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers;
that they do not rise,
nor possess the land,
nor fill the face of the world with cities.

(As would this)

Isa:14:22:
For I will rise up against them,
saith the LORD of hosts,
and cut off from Babylon the name,
and remnant,
and son,
and nephew,
saith the LORD.

(If the mighty men had children it might only affect 3 generations)

Isa:14:23:
I will also make it a possession for the bittern,
and pools of water:
and I will sweep it with the besom of destruction,
saith the LORD of hosts.

(A description of what happens to Babylon)

Isa:14:24:
The LORD of hosts hath sworn,
saying,
Surely as I have thought,
so shall it come to pass;
and as I have purposed,
so shall it stand:

(The above will happen)

Isa:14:25:
That I will break the Assyrian in my land,
and upon my mountains tread him under foot:
then shall his yoke depart from off them,
and his burden depart from off their shoulders.

((Once killed (like those prophecised to fight against what should not be fought against) that yoke and consequences are removed))

Isa:14:26:
This is the purpose that is purposed upon the whole earth:
and this is the hand that is stretched out upon all the nations.

(I think it is Jer:25 explains how the nations were visited to drink a cup of wrath and if they did not fight as prophecised the whole world would suffer the consequences, I didn't go re-read this so I reserve the right to modify the way the words say it happens or the exact consequences if they refuse.)

Isa:14:27:
For the LORD of hosts hath purposed,
and who shall disannul it?
and his hand is stretched out,
and who shall turn it back?

(No explanation needed)
If I missed some passages that deal with just this subject please let me know.

Later

[CoreIssue]

In the OT they were always called 'sons of man' or 'sons of men'.
No. They are called sons of God in Genesis. And the linquists agree this is the meaning.

Simply because you cannot find another same usage does not make it wrong.
In the OT 'sons of God' refer to un-fallen Angels as in Job.
Angels are, as well, sons of God. Even though they are not male.

Female saints are sons of God. It is not a term meaning male.
If all of Adams children were born into sin then they would never be referenced as being 'sons of God', that is a title reserved for those who are in good standing with God, not sinners.
So. Enoch, taken to Heaven alive, was not in good standings with God? Or Noah?

Bad argument here.
That these are called 'sons of God' would also mean that these Angels had not yet done anything to be classified as fallen.
War is long over. Fallen already fell and were chained.

Taking wives from the daughters of men would certainly change that. It also mentions they took (many) wives, as many as they wanted. Noah was righteous and he and his sons had one wife each.

Angels cannot breed. They are not male. They are not flesh.
The giants mentioned are not the children of Angels and daughters of men, they are the Angels,
Wrong. Goliath was a Nephilim. So he was an angel?

the children of these two would be the mighty men of renown.

It does not say they were the children of these marriages. It simply says they were at the same time.

Now it also says and after that, but it does not say right after that. That time could be as far away as the book of Revelations.

Goliath was a Nephilim. And very much human.

Ge:6:1:
And it came to pass,
when men began to multiply on the face of the earth,
and daughters were born unto them,
Ge:6:2:
That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair;
and they took them wives of all which they chose.

What is it? By your thinking there were no angel females?

A company is not sexual. A race is.

And only flesh can beget flesh.

Ge:6:3:
And the LORD said,
My spirit shall not always strive with man,
for that he also is flesh:
yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Ge:6:4:
There were giants in the earth in those days;
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 mighty men which were of old,
men of renown.

If the flood was the cause of death for all flesh (including the men of renown);

Goliath was a Nephilim. And of a race of Nephilim.

Ge:6:7:
And the LORD said,
I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth;
both man,
and beast,
and the creeping thing,
and the fowls of the air;
for it repenteth me that I have made them.

All about Man.

What is Jude referencing;

Jude:1:14:
And Enoch also,
the seventh from Adam,
prophesied of these,
saying,
Behold,
the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Jude:1:15:
To execute judgment upon all,
and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed,
and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
Jude:1:16:
These are murmurers,
complainers,
walking after their own lusts;
and their mouth speaketh great swelling words,
having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

Enoch's prophecy was for these 'sons of God', the flood would not take care of these because they cannot die, but 10,000 Holy Angels could certainly bind them in chains in a pit where could no longer do the ungodly things they had been doing.

The Book of Enoch is Gnostic. Not from God.

So, you are a Gnostic? That would make sense as to where all you bad doctrine comes from, including denying Christ is God incarnate.

This link also hints that 'sons of God' are Angels,

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1/1154917370-5086.html

It doesn't.

Eze:28:13:
Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God;
every precious stone was thy covering,
the sardius,
topaz,
and the diamond,
the beryl,
the onyx,
and the jasper,
the sapphire,
the emerald,
and the carbuncle,
and gold:
the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

(It doesn't appear he has fallen in the above verse and that is in Eden after Adam was there for there was no trees or grass ect according to Ge:2 before Adam was alive)

Before Gen 1:2

And again you try to return to the discussion of Revelation. The issue here is who angels are and what they are.

You did not deal with a single point of my post. Not one.

I want to see you respond to my points about angels instead of trying to start the Revelation discussion up here.

[MHz]

Hi Core,

The Book of Enoch is Gnostic. Not from God.

So, you are a Gnostic? That would make sense as to where all you bad doctrine comes from, including denying Christ is God incarnate.
This is an issue you might want to take up with Jude, the author of the same book I quoted.

It's quite clear I rub you the wrong way. The reason may lay in when we first met on the Rapture Ready forum, you made a fairly long post and I found an issue with it not more than four sentences into it. You quit going there, for whatever reason, so I came to this site to talk about some things (which turned out to be quite a few things as of this writing), yet even though I try to explain why and how I have come to believe the things I do, if I do not abandon that view and totally accept your 'version of things' I get a new label.
On this one subject I have given the Scripture that I have considered before forming even an opinion. It is not one verse, or even three, it is in the tens, as it is for any subject that I have opinions on. The one thing I will never do with you is ask about a verse I'm not quite sure wher and how it fits in with the scheme of things.

In the fall of last year I said I would have six months to give you an idea of what I believed Scripture said and which Scripture lead me to that belief. Although there was a pause in that six months by the end you did know a lot about what I thought and why.

Have I grown since then, yes, a few topics have been explore even more, whether you have heard about that I will not say, use your memory.

Comments like the above one do not affect me, no matter the number, your labels do not affect me, no matter the number. It's quite clear if you don't believe just as you do, then you are in error.
You have asked me several times who taught me, now it is my turn, by what authority do you have the knowledge you promote?

Really how should I respond to comments like after Jesus says Lazarus is dead and you respond by saying well he wasn't really dead. Four minites after the brain does not have breath giving it oxygen it seases to ever be able to function again properly (unless kept very cold) at this time the flesh also begins to decay. Yet you have the nerve to say that even after dour days a person is not really dead.

You keep telling me to stay on topic yet it is more than okay for you to post things like the above. I'm kind of at a cross-road right now with you, sort of like the rich Jewish guy in hell (after all, who was Moses and the prophets sent to), if you won't believe Scripture any amount of words on my part will not change things.

Should you ever widh to examine what is actually true in Scripture you also have to accept that your current knowledge is like a house of verses. A collection that paints the bigger picture. It isn't a sin to have that house come crashing down, which it should if all verses do not fit into that house. What arises will be even more strong. More than once when I thought I knew someyhing it turned out I may not have known very much because just one verse was out of place. Rather than toss that verse aside I had to disassemble what I knew and rebuild to allow that verse to fit in. Pride was a barrior to that the first few times it happened. Now you might be tempted to say it is time to do that again, it isn't even though that puts me at odds with many of my brothers, there are simple too many verses involved.

For soul sleep, relax abit, what you were is preserved in Heaven, in storage for the day it returns to what it left behind, only this time you have the second birth.

I may or may not respond to the rest of your post.

[CoreIssue]

Hey MHz,



The Book of Enoch is Gnostic. Not from God.

So, you are a Gnostic? That would make sense as to where all you bad doctrine comes from, including denying Christ is God incarnate.
This is an issue you might want to take up with Jude, the author of the same book I quoted.

Jude wrote Enoch? Am I reading you clearly on that?

There are 3 books of Enoch out there. The oldest is a few hundred years BC.

Who says Jude quoted from that book? You are assuming.

It contains a lot of errors. It is not from God.
It's quite clear I rub you the wrong way.
Puzzle and frustrate, yes. Rub the wrong way, no.

It is very clear most of your theology comes from sources other than the Bible. You indeed do add tons of statements that are found in Gnostic resources.
The reason may lay in when we first met on the Rapture Ready forum, you made a fairly long post and I found an issue with it not more than four sentences into it. You quit going there, for whatever reason,
I did not quite there because of you. In fact, I invited you here.

My reason for leaving was that of not having enough time to divide between CTZ and there. So, of course, I am going to go to my home site.

so I came to this site to talk about some things (which turned out to be quite a few things as of this writing), yet even though I try to explain why and how I have come to believe the things I do, if I do not abandon that view and totally accept your 'version of things' I get a new label.

No. Labels may be good or they may be bad. But we all have them.

You do pronounce many things that cannot be found or supported in the Bible. But they can be found in Gnostic and cultic sources, including JWs, Mormon, Christadelphians and some others.

What am I suppose to use for an effective term for what you claim that is not found in Christianity, and even more so rejected and condemned by many?

You reject the divinity of Christ. That cannot be called Christian. Just an example.

It means the doctrine is not Christian. I have made no judgement on you salvation.

On this one subject I have given the Scripture that I have considered before forming even an opinion. It is not one verse, or even three, it is in the tens, as it is for any subject that I have opinions on. The one thing I will never do with you is ask about a verse I'm not quite sure wher and how it fits in with the scheme of things.

I appreciate that. But listing verses that have connection to a subject is not proof.

And that is why we could not go on until we resolved more basic doctrines.

As with angels. I listed out meanings, issues and so on. You did not address them, but went off on a tangent that was leading back to revelation.

And yes, you are leaning on the Book of Enoch, which is a Gnostic Book with errors in it.

In the fall of last year I said I would have six months to give you an idea of what I believed Scripture said and which Scripture lead me to that belief. Although there was a pause in that six months by the end you did know a lot about what I thought and why.


Indeed I have. But indeed I see you have gone outside the Bible for much of your thinking.

You have said too many things right out of the playbooks of non-Christians.

Have I grown since then, yes, a few topics have been explore even more, whether you have heard about that I will not say, use your memory.

I have seen some changes, indeed. And that is why I keep discussing.

Comments like the above one do not affect me, no matter the number, your labels do not affect me, no matter the number. It's quite clear if you don't believe just as you do, then you are in error.

Doctrinally, I am not. But remember, I have not said you were not saved.

You have asked me several times who taught me, now it is my turn, by what authority do you have the knowledge you promote?

By 45 years of combined theological studies from many sources. And indepent studies.

I am non-denominational, but I will not accept what does not have a basis in the Bible, theologically speaking.

Really how should I respond to comments like after Jesus says Lazarus is dead and you respond by saying well he wasn't really dead. Four minites after the brain does not have breath giving it oxygen it seases to ever be able to function again properly (unless kept very cold) at this time the flesh also begins to decay. Yet you have the nerve to say that even after dour days a person is not really dead.

Yes, I have more than the nerve to say that. The Bible says he was not resurrected but he was raised.

Resurrected means the spirit left the body. Raised means it has not.

Resurrected is never used for any other application than the spirit returning to the body. Ever.

What does God care about you 4 minutes? He stopped the earth's rotation, in violation of physical law, to prolong a day.
You keep telling me to stay on topic yet it is more than okay for you to post things like the above.
Because it is directly on target regarding your claim. You are trying use it as proof of Soul Sleep. It is not.

That was my rebuttal to that point.

We are not a single nature being. We are body, spirit and mind/soul. The Body is the flesh with no independent life, thoughts or whatever. It is a massive set of sensors and tools.

The spirit has thoughts and existence independent of the body. That is how the Holy Spirit can indwell it, how it can be cleansed and perfect while the flesh is not. And the mind/soul is where decisions are made from the input of both spirit and body.

It also is used to define a complete being. And is used with both the spirits in and out of the body in the Bible. That is relevant to the discussion regarding deal bodies and sleeping spirits.

I'm kind of at a cross-road right now with you, sort of like the rich Jewish guy in hell (after all, who was Moses and the prophets sent to), if you won't believe Scripture any amount of words on my part will not change things.

I believe scripture. But there were more than Jews in Hell and Paradise.

I believe he was a Jew, but I cannot prove it.

But for this issue, it does not matter what nation he belonged to. The issue is his being awake in Hell and Lazarus being awake in Paradise, with both places being off of the Pit, in the earth.

Not the grave where the body is, but special places where saints and fallen angels and people are kept.

Abraham, the Rich Guy and Lazarus were all very much awake. Which is pertinent to the discussion. The Rich Guy being Jewish is not.
Should you ever widh to examine what is actually true in Scripture you also have to accept that your current knowledge is like a house of verses. A collection that paints the bigger picture.
I agree on that.

But one must read properly the verses and passage according to word meaning and grammar.

Yes, Passage X combines with Passage Y for larger meaning. No. Passage X and Passage Y are not read, together, as a single passage and then intepreted.

Meaning + meaning = Greater meaning. But they remain individual meanings.

Just because similar or same words are used does not make them the same issue.
It isn't a sin to have that house come crashing down, which it should if all verses do not fit into that house.
Then why, when I show you, as here, angels cannot bear children, by verse descriptions and word meaninngs, do you refuse to deal with the issues, but take off on a tangent that has nothing to do with those points made?

A spirit being does not have flesh. A company does not reproduce. Where are the female angels? Where are the baby angels? How could offspring from evil couplings be saved without a savior? How can angels be free if chained? How, by your demand, can Goliath and his nation be angels since they could be killed?

You are not answering those questions. You took off on Satan heading back to Revelation.

That is not relevant to the issue I raise.
What arises will be even more strong. More than once when I thought I knew someyhing it turned out I may not have known very much because just one verse was out of place.
Agree. Had many of those moments over the years.
Rather than toss that verse aside I had to disassemble what I knew and rebuild to allow that verse to fit in.
But you are not doing that here. You are evading the points I made that make your doctrine impossible.
Pride was a barrior to that the first few times it happened. Now you might be tempted to say it is time to do that again, it isn't even though that puts me at odds with many of my brothers, there are simple too many verses involved.
You are not dealing with what I said. You have a set handful of verses that you will not get off of.

Those verse and issues must harmonize with what I have pointed out, verse wise.

The harmonize for me. I have no problem with Nephilim, sons of God, children, Goliath and the nation of Nephilim Goliath was part of. But you have a serious problem and just went silent on it.

For soul sleep, relax abit, what you were is preserved in Heaven, in storage for the day it returns to what it left behind, only this time you have the second birth.

No. The Bible says, in the Church, our spirits are born again, not our flesh. And we are born-again druring this life.

Why? Because the Holy Spirit, who is God, cannot dwell in an unclean house. He dwells in our spirts, which is us, not our flesh.

Bibles say we are born again, upon repentence. Our flesh is not born-again, but glorified.

Two different things.
I may or may not respond to the rest of your post.
I would prefer you to respond to the issues in the opening one.

Later.

[MHz]

Hi Core,


Jude wrote Enoch? Am I reading you clearly on

that?

There are 3 books of Enoch out there. The oldest

is a few hundred years BC.

Who says Jude quoted from that book? You are

assuming.
Apparently you are not reading what I said correctly.
Jude wrote Jude;
Jude:1:1:
Jude,
the servant of Jesus Christ,
and brother of James,
to them that are sanctified by God the Father,
and preserved in Jesus Christ,
and called:

Are you saying Jude has his facts wrong, Enoch

either prophecised what Jude wrote about or he

did not. Whether it was a direct quote or a

summary, it is Scripture that I will pay

attention to, and if it conflicts with your

version I will go with Scripture every single

time.

It is very clear most of your theology comes

from sources other than the Bible. You indeed do

add tons of statements that are found in Gnostic

resources.
Then it should be quite easy to find those

references, that you know what they say would

indicate that you have read these things. True

or not?


You do pronounce many things that cannot be

found or supported in the Bible. But they can be

found in Gnostic and cultic sources, including

JWs, Mormon, Christadelphians and some

others.
Why do you think I post so many verses, it is to

show, whomever, what my reference is. The odds

are that I have read hundreds more on that same

subject that apply (or do not apply) to a

subject. That is also the way I read, by

subject, the topic is always introduced. The

last subject in one verse may be the first in

the next verse, not a continueation of the first

subject in the previous verse. If anything that

is very different between us, you seem to read

it in linear time, it isn't like that. One verse

can be about one subject but cover a vast amount

of time.

What am I suppose to use for an effective term

for what you claim that is not found in

Christianity, and even more so rejected and

condemned by many?
Oh thats right, if many agree it must be

correct. Have you ever believed a lie to be

truth only to find out later the real truth. You

aren't questioning what you believe, you are

questioning what I believe, not based on what I

say might have some truth in it, it is rejected

because it is in conflict with your current

view. Now I could undersatnd this if at some

point I was to say " I don't have an

explaination", so far I think I have had a

responce along with some verse, being semi-dead

is not in Scripture, you either have the breath

of life or you do not. To be with Christ is to

never die, that just might require taking a nap

before that is reality, the one napping is not

losing out on anything other than more of what

went on when he was alive. For some even not

being raised untill Judgement Day might be a

blessing, when they come awake it is all over,

Satan is gone forever. The ones in the thousand

years will see him at his very worst.

You reject the divinity of Christ. That cannot

be called Christian. Just an example.
I certainly accept His authority over me and I

certainly accept that he arose from the dead (as

I might also do) and ascended to His Father

which art in Heaven. Maybe it is time you stood

upto the 10,000 that keep you in these bonds.

It means the doctrine is not Christian. I

have made no judgement on you salvation.
Nor can you, other than whether or not to

consider me a brother. Probably a good thing for

me as you do question my professed faith in my

Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, the only

begotten son of the Lord God Almighty.

I appreciate that. But listing verses that have

connection to a subject is not proof.
Depends on how it fits in with a lot of other

verses, all subjects have influence on each

other.

And that is why we could not go on until

we resolved more basic doctrines.
Who says we will even get past the 6th chapter

of the very first book?

As with angels. I listed out meanings,

issues and so on. You did not address them, but

went off on a tangent that was leading back to

revelation.
Well, I haven't gotten that far yet, if there is

an order of angels it has little to do with who

are the 'sons of God' in Ch:6. Of course I could

have read some on that part, if Scripture

covered it in any detail, as it was the ones you

would call giants is not what I get from those

first verses, they would be of the 'mighty men'.

And yes, you are leaning on the Book of

Enoch, which is a Gnostic Book with errors in

it.
Would you like some actual quotes from that

book? Enoch should know if there were fallen

angels around then or not as it is a pre-flood

perspective.


Indeed I have. But indeed I see you have

gone outside the Bible for much of your

thinking.
Do I post Scripture from the Holy Bible

exclusively or not? Even from my 'outdated

translation' sons of God are still angels.

You have said too many things right out

of the playbooks of non-Christians.

Whatever, reading Scripture before opening my

mouth and parying for help in understanding His

word is about as non-Christian as I get, and

just for the record my bible was free, just in

case you spend money (in any form)in the search

for knowledge
Have I grown since then, yes, a few topics have

been explore even more, whether you have heard

about that I will not say, use your memory.

I have seen some changes

Any back-tracks?

But remember, I have not said you were not

saved.

A wise move as that would only affect your

salvation


By 45 years of combined theological studies from

many sources. And indepent studies.

When I was ten I was sent to Church alone with

the $1 for the collection plate, I went to the

bus-depot to hang with my school friends

instead. The Minister busted me by saying "Hi!

Haven't seen you in awhile". After that my

mother gave me $0.5 on Sunday and let me decide

where I was going.

Now why do the words "many sources" make my

eye-brows twitch?
I am non-denominational, but I will not accept

what does not have a basis in the Bible,

theologically speaking.

Yes, I have more than the nerve to say that. The

Bible says he was not resurrected but he was

raised.

From where?
Did Jesus plainly say he was dead?

Joh:11:25:
Jesus said unto her,
I am the resurrection,
and the life:
he that believeth in me,
though he were dead,
yet shall he live:

The only reason Lazarus could not remain alive

is that it was not the resurrection that will be

on the last day, glorified bodies are not given

to anybody but Christ until then.

I believe he was a Jew, but I cannot prove it.
You could only proove it through a verse. The issue was about the color associated with him, it applies to another subject.

But for this issue, it does not matter what

nation he belonged to. The issue is his being

awake in Hell and Lazarus being awake in

Paradise, with both places being off of the Pit,

in the earth.

If Lazarus was awakw why didn't the rich man(from wherever) as Lazarus himself to go for water?

Not the grave where the body is, but special

places where saints and fallen angels and people

are kept.
Core, face it, when you are alive you are 'on the earth', when dead you are 'under (pit, grave, hell, etc) the earth';
Re:5:3:
And no man in heaven,
nor in earth,
neither under the earth,
was able to open the book,
neither to look thereon.

Re:5:13:
And every creature which is in heaven,
and on the earth,
and under the earth,
and such as are in the sea,
and all that are in them,
heard I saying,
Blessing,
and honour,
and glory,
and power,
be unto him that sitteth upon the throne,
and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

Just who (can hear) under the earth except the dead.
[/QUOTE]


Abraham, the Rich Guy and Lazarus were all very

much awake.
Then there must be some words in Scripture that say Lazarus is aware of anything
Which is pertinent to the

discussion. The Rich Guy being Jewish is not.

But one must read properly the verses and

passage according to word meaning and grammar.
They won't fit otherwise, its fine to read about what other men have to say about what a word means, but you seem to balk at reading all the other verses that use that very word. Granted a word like rest will come up with many verses, without a electronic Bible it would take months, even then one could be missed. a large group can be refined even further. The only advantage I can see over the later is that you get to read more Scripture, only a few will apply to the current subject but all apply to other subjects. That is why my comment about stand-alone verses, there just aren't any.

Yes, Passage X combines with Passage Y for

larger meaning. No. Passage X and Passage Y are

not read, together, as a single passage and then

intepreted.

Meaning + meaning = Greater meaning. But they

remain individual meanings.
That is a good point, after finding verses that would seem to fit you also have to go to that book to read that entire passage, even more extreme is the previous and latter chapters, just to be on the safe side.

Just because similar or same words are used does

not make them the same issue.
True, but that is a good start. Take the first seal, white horse, rider, bow, noner of those word had returned anything worthy. Once I found words like quiver and polished shaft that verse had a differentr meaning. Nobody agreed but neither could they come up with an explanation of where they did fit. This is just one example of many, just in case you are tempted to say this is where I went off-course, more proper it is when I began to think for myself.


Then why, when I show you, as here, angels

cannot bear children, by verse descriptions and

word meaninngs, do you refuse to deal with the

issues, but take off on a tangent that has

nothing to do with those points made?
Because you haven't gotten past who the 'sons of God' are, men are already mentioned, there are not two different groups of men, men are men, even the children are called men.

A spirit being does not have flesh. A company

does not reproduce. Where are the female angels?

Where are the baby angels? How could offspring

from evil couplings be saved without a savior?

How can angels be free if chained? How, by your

demand, can Goliath and his nation be angels

since they could be killed?

If angels can appear as men and if Lot gave his virgin daughters to 'save' them from those who wanted to have sex with them that would mean they might be completely human forms. I don't know that angels couldn't have children on their own, I do not being given in marriage would certainly prevent that, who knows what the new heaven will bring for them, it would seem to be larger as will be our New Earth (verses skipped for now, I will wait for your objection first.

Goliath wasn't an angel, notice he was one of a kind, a mighty man amoungst men. Compared to giants or other mighty men he could have been the runt of the litter.
Try looking at the beast that was and is not, see how much would have to change in your version to fit that in?


You are not answering those questions. You took

off on Satan heading back to Revelation.
Some of your links were about Satan also having already fallen by the time Adam existed. That was my reply to verses about Satan's fall, nothing point to an earlier time than what he did to Eve. Want Revelations version, read about the first woman in Ch:12.



Agree. Had many of those moments over the years.


Then you would agree that it isn't a big deal as long as you haven't been selling books or such. How would an author handle that kind of situation?

But you are not doing that here. You are evading

the points I made that make your doctrine

impossible.
That is because it was already disassembled to allow for that verse,

Pride was a barrior to that the first

few times it happened. Now you might be tempted

to say it is time to do that again, it isn't

even though that puts me at odds with many of my

brothers, there are simple too many verses

involved.
You are not dealing with what I said. You have a

set handful of verses that you will not get off

of.

Those verse and issues must harmonize with what

I have pointed out, verse wise.

The harmonize for me. I have no problem with

Nephilim, sons of God, children, Goliath and the

nation of Nephilim Goliath was part of. But you

have a serious problem and just went silent on

it.

Really. when did the giants first appear and who were their human aprents?


Later.

[CoreIssue]

Well, I am frustrated here. Almost done with the post and lost it.

Trying to get us both back on subject, since we were both wandering away, above, I will address this.



Then why, when I show you, as here, angels

cannot bear children, by verse descriptions and

word meaninngs, do you refuse to deal with the

issues, but take off on a tangent that has

nothing to do with those points made?
Because you haven't gotten past who the 'sons of God' are, men are already mentioned, there are not two different groups of men, men are men, even the children are called men.

OK. Here you are wrong and I will show you why.
1 When men
Strong's Number: 0120 Browse Lexicon (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/browse.cgi?number=120&version=kjv) Original WordWord Origin~dafrom (0119 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=119&version=kjv))Transliterated WordTDNT (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=0120&version=kjv#Legend) Entry'adamTWOT - 25aPhonetic SpellingParts of Speechaw-dawm' http://bible.crosswalk.com/images/audio.gif (http://bible.crosswalk.com/cgi-bin/lexicon.pl?id=0120h) Noun Masculine Definition
man, mankind
man, human being
man, mankind (much more frequently intended sense in OT)
Adam, first man
city in Jordan valley
Means all of Man, not just the lost.
began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
Those men in covenant relationship to God, sons of God, stopped just marrying women in relationship to God and began marrying who they would.
Did the women suddenly get beautiful? Or did the men start looking at them sexually and no longer spiritually?

3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with [a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%206&version=31#fen-NIV-141a)] man forever, for he is mortal [b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%206&version=31#fen-NIV-141b)] ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
4 The Nephilim

Means Giants. Nothing more. Goliath and his whole nation were Nephilim.
were on the earth in those days—
At the time the sons of God were marrying any woman they wanted.
and also afterward—
Goliath and his nation, among others.
when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them.
Again, the grammar is clear. At the same time of. Not marriage or offspring.
They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
The giants were the heroes.

You have all of man with the sons of God men marrying daughters of those who were not sons of God.

The other facts I have posted demand the grammatical reading is in fact accurate.

By proving angels cannot have babies it automatically eliminates your interpretations.


A spirit being does not have flesh. A company
does not reproduce. Where are the female angels?
Where are the baby angels? How could offspring
from evil couplings be saved without a savior?
How can angels be free if chained? How, by your
demand, can Goliath and his nation be angels
since they could be killed?

If angels can appear as men and if Lot gave his virgin daughters to 'save' them from those who wanted to have sex with them that would mean they might be completely human forms.

Human form is not the same as being human. Sperm is life. Angels cannot create life.

A kind reproduces its own kind. Angels are not human kind.
I don't know that angels couldn't have children on their own,
They do not have genes. Sperm are genes halfs. They are alive.

Only human genes can merge with human eggs.

I do not being given in marriage would certainly prevent that, who knows what the new heaven will bring for them, it would seem to be larger as will be our New Earth (verses skipped for now, I will wait for your objection first.

They are a company. Races reproduce. Companies do not.
Goliath wasn't an angel, notice he was one of a kind, a mighty man amoungst men.

He was a Nephilim from a nation of Nephilim.
Compared to giants or other mighty men he could have been the runt of the litter.

No. You are trying to hypothesis your way out of this.

Numbers
"There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight."

It says in Genesis there would be more. Here are more.

It did not say lesser. It said the same without qualification.
Try looking at the beast that was and is not, see how much would have to change in your version to fit that in?
Stay with what the verses say. You are trying to deny the point here.

You are not answering those questions. You took
off on Satan heading back to Revelation.
Some of your links were about Satan also having already fallen by the time Adam existed. That was my reply to verses about Satan's fall, nothing point to an earlier time than what he did to Eve. Want Revelations version, read about the first woman in Ch:12.

I linked to that for the issue of who angels were. I did not see rewriting the whole thing to delete the other stuff.

Read the Pre-Adamic links. They lay out the rebellion being before Adam.
Really. when did the giants first appear and who were their human aprents?
Humans. It does not say.

It says they were on the earth the same time saints were marrying whoever they wanted. And the giants were heroes and there would be more giants.

That is the sum total of what is said.

Later

[CTZonEdit]

Why is all this legend about giants?

Ever seen Shaquille ONeil? Is he a angelic/human offspring?

Or this "tallest man" (http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/041804/nat_20040418033.shtml)

or all these men? (http://www.missioncreep.com/mundie/gallery/gallery13.htm)

Are they all angelic babies? No they are clearly human. Why now throw out all logic when the word "giant" appears in the bible?

A biblical giant is nothing more than a taller than normal human male. So it makes more sense that the Nephilim were a group or tribe of humans where this abnormal gene was more common to them.

Unless you believe that Goliath was 50 feet tall with one eye and stomped around like the giant from Jack and the Beanstalk or other fairy tales. Which would lend one to believe that some angelic power mated with a human in order to create such a mythical beast.

Lets separate fact from fiction and keep things simply biblical.

[MHz]

Hi Core,
I don't see this as going anywhere, but here goes anyway'

That the sons,
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1/1155009245-3650.html
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) son, grandson, child, member of a group
a) son, male child
b) grandson
c) children (pl. - male and female)
d) youth, young men (pl.)
e) young (of animals)
f) sons (as characterisation, i.e. sons of injustice [for un- righteous men] or sons of God [for angels]
g) people (of a nation) (pl.)
h) of lifeless things, i.e. sparks, stars, arrows (fig.)
i) a member of a guild, order, class

The Hebrew Lexicon that points to sons of God as being Angels is #8 and Ge:6:2 is one verse referenced, so are the ones in Job.


giants,
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/5/1155008501-9252.html
Outline of Biblical Usage

1) giants, the Nephilim

Now before you begin to clap your hands go read the Hebrews Lexicon because it points to fallen angels. The sons of God are no longer called that, they have sinned by taking wives, their fallen name is giants.

So where is all this getting us?

So far we have talked about man, man was not the only flesh God was intending to kill, these verses explain why;
Ge:6:7:
And the LORD said,
I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth;
both man,
and beast,
and the creeping thing,
and the fowls of the air;
for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Ge:6:11:
The earth also was corrupt before God,
and the earth was filled with violence.
Ge:6:12:
And God looked upon the earth,
and,
behold,
it was corrupt;
for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
Ge:6:13:
And God said unto Noah,
The end of all flesh is come before me;
for the earth is filled with violence through them;
and,
behold,
I will destroy them with the earth.

Now the above says that all that were to die were violent. Who is more likely able to do that to other flesh, men or fallen angels. Scripture doesn't say how they did it(why give that info out) only that they did do it.

You have still yet to address what Jude said about Enoch's prophecy. Holy Angels are the only possibility for who these saints could be. At Noah's time he was the only one perfect in his generations. If the flood was to take all flesh, who were the Lord and 10.000 Holy Angels coming for?

Ge:1 gives the boundry between Heaven and Earth. It is the surface of liquid water and the surface of dry land. That is why birds are called the fowls are flying in Heaven;
Ge:1:6:
And God said,
Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters,
and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Ge:1:7:
And God made the firmament,
and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament:
and it was so.
Ge:1:8:
And God called the firmament Heaven.
And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Ge:1:9:
And God said,
Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place,
and let the dry land appear:
and it was so.
Ge:1:10:
And God called the dry land Earth;
and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas:
and God saw that it was good.


Ge:1:20:
And God said,
Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,
and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

Its late but I have been reading some other verses in Scripture that mention giants, I haven't yet had time to read the passages they come from.
This one is interesting though;

2Sa:21:20:
And there was yet a battle in Gath,
where was a man of great stature,
that had on every hand six fingers,
and on every foot six toes,
four and twenty in number;
and he also was born to the giant.

Anyway let me read those verse.




Later

[CoreIssue]

Hi MHz,

Of course, study it out.

I will just note a couple of things.

CTZonEdit summed it up nicely. Your doctrine does not come from the Bible. It comes from the Book of Enoch, from which the false doctrine was created, long ago.

Angels are incapable of making babies.

Sons of God, as linquist agree, means those in covenant relationship with God, be they angels, human or of the 4 Living Creatures company. It did not change meaning from OT to NT.

There were Nephilim after the flood.
Numbers 13: (NIV)
33We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."
A whole nation of them.

Your doctrine does not work.

[MHz]

Hi Core,

Of course, study it out.
I am doing that, but I read the chapter not just the verse, so if my responces seem slow, be patient, you are not one I am willing to stick my foot into my mouth with, with others, they would be privy to the process

I will just note a couple of things.
So will I, if Scripture can be shown I will take that over any words you care to throw my way, one verse in your whole post, just your words. Fine I will take you throught it step by step by step.

CTZonEdit summed it up nicely. Your doctrine does not come from the Bible. It comes from the Book of Enoch, from which the false doctrine was created, long ago.
I did a word search on CTZonEdit in the KJV and,
*** END OF SEARCH ***
Total occurrences for (CTZonEdit) is [ 0 ]

My doctrine for this is from:
Jude:1:1:
Jude,
the servant of Jesus Christ,
and brother of James,
to them that are sanctified by God the Father,
and preserved in Jesus Christ,
and called:

He was authorised by the Holy Spirit of God to write what he wrote. Deal with it, if it sends your house of verses crashing down so that not even one is left standing, deal with it. You are wearing me very thin on this, Jude with the shortest book in the whole bible has more sway with me than 10,000 of your words, deal with it.
What was Jude referencing?

Angels are incapable of making babies.
Again you lack Scripture, even withe the Lexicon word defination it lacks reading Scripture, you would have to take that route for that to mean something, there is something in what is read that comes from the ones that do not apply.

Sons of God, as linquist agree, means those in covenant relationship with God, be they angels, human or of the 4 Living Creatures company. It did not change meaning from OT to NT.
Bull biscuts

There were Nephilim after the flood.
Numbers 13: (NIV)
33We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."
A whole nation of them.
Finally, something I can work with.
How tall were the 'mighty men', you know the ones who were the children of the giants and women?

Would a 'giant' be able be above the flood waters;
Ge:7:20:
Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail;
and the mountains were covered.

That is about 21 feet. Scripture says Noah was perfect in his generations, Does that also mean he was not from any giants or any of his past family. This can be taken further, who did his sons marry, were they also perfect in their generations?

Later

[CTZonEdit]

Wow let me see if I have this right. You actually saying that there were humans that were 21 feet tall?!

Of course you would have to in order to believe this 'fairy tale' of logic. Sheesh.

God said he destroyed every human being in the flood except for those on the ark. So now you have God lying because he destroyed everyone except the 21 ft tall 'giants' and those on the ark.

[MHz]

Hi,CTZonEdit, that was a fast responce, and greetings as we haven't spoken in awhile, I hope everything is well for you.
Now to the issues.
Wow let me see if I have this right. You actually saying that there were humans that were 21 feet tall?!
Well, Scripture does call any children of the 'giants' mighty men, that would seem to include all of them as dieing in the flood, so they are under 21 feet as that is the depth of the water on the highest land.
So we can assume they drowned, no need for any further action.
So I'll ask you the very same question I asked Core, in the book of Jude, found in the NT of the Holy Bible, the Lord comes with 10,000 of his saints to(for lack of a better word battle witth some), just who is he talking about? Here read it for yourself;
Jude:1:14:
And Enoch also,
the seventh from Adam,
prophesied of these,
saying,
Behold,
the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Jude:1:15:
To execute judgment upon all,
and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed,
and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
Jude:1:16:
These are murmurers,
complainers,
walking after their own lusts;
and their mouth speaketh great swelling words,
having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

No man was without sin after Adam fell, the flood would take care of that, so who are the ungodly and what ungodly acts were they commiting. This was before law (other than about the tree) was given.

The longer this question is side-stepped the more I feel you cannot explain it, if you need some time I'm fine with that, I'm doing the same with verses taht reference giants in the OT and I will read many verses before I post something that I'm quite sure is a valid answer, untill then there is a pause in that topic.

Of course you would have to in order to believe this 'fairy tale' of logic. Sheesh.
Selah is a much more bibilical term,
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/5/1155100981-5268.html

God said he destroyed every human being in the flood except for those on the ark. So now you have God lying because he destroyed everyone except the 21 ft tall 'giants' and those on the ark.
All flesh, not just the flesh of man.
God does not lie, neither would He allow any of His prophets or Disciples of Christ to do so, yet we have Jude, the last book before Revelation that talks almost exclusively about fallen angels.

[CoreIssue]

Would a 'giant' be able be above the flood waters;
Ge:7:20:
Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail;
and the mountains were covered.

That is about 21 feet.

That is one of the most absurd arguments I have ever heard.

So, they could have stood on top of a mountain, with no food and never sleeping?

Absurd argument.

[MHz]

Where does it say an angel needs either if these, having fallen would not chamge that nautre of an angel, just like both kinds of men still need foor and sleep.
The the verses I posted earlier on some thred it says those from the nations come 'speedily' to Christ's house of prayer, there is no indication of sleep or stopping to eat.

After the flood any Ggant we are given dimensions for are less tha 21 feet, the one dimension is 9 cubits, 6 less than the flood waters.
Do you believe God would give the depth of the water just in passing and not have that 'somehow' fit with something else. I believe if it is important enough to be written about then it dioes have meaning, even if another verse is needed to 'complete' the picture.

At any rate we seem to have come to anoter stand-still.

Later

[CoreIssue]

Where does it say an angel needs either if these, having fallen would not chamge that nautre of an angel,
Bad, illogical argument:
They are not angels to start with.
Angels are spirits, not flesh.
Angels cannot reproduce.
Angels could be any height they desire to be, since they are not flesh.
They could stand on the land at the bottom of the flood if they wished.
They cannot die. Goliath and his nation all could, and did, die. So did these Pre-Flood giants.

You just defeated your own argument on how tall they were.

just like both kinds of men still need foor and sleep.

And they were men, thus they needed food and sleep. And had to be men if, by your demand, they fathered children.

The the verses I posted earlier on some thred it says those from the nations come 'speedily' to Christ's house of prayer, there is no indication of sleep or stopping to eat.

You didn't post any verse I remember saying such. You just said there were. Please post it and let us see if it fits here (it doesn't)

After the flood any Ggant we are given dimensions for are less tha 21 feet, the one dimension is 9 cubits, 6 less than the flood waters.

You are making rediculous statments here. The Giants did not surive. Only Noah and his group.

And now the Pre-Flood Nephilim were 21 feet tall and angels while the Post Flood were only 15 feet tall and human.

Talk about making unbiblical claims!

Genesis says that after the Pre-Flood there would be more giants. Knocks your arguments right out. They were all human.

So now, to fit your doctrine we have some Nephilim being human and some angels. Some 21 and others 15 feet tall.

Amazing when all the Bible says is there were Nephilim before and after the flood. And they were men of renound, at both times.

The Bible does not back you.

Do you believe God would give the depth of the water just in passing and not have that 'somehow' fit with something else. I believe if it is important enough to be written about then it dioes have meaning, even if another verse is needed to 'complete' the picture.

It made it clear the whole earth was covered. Period.
At any rate we seem to have come to anoter stand-still.
And again your doctrine has you reaching outside of and adding to what the Bible says.

The Bible says Niphilim, singular as a group. Not 2 groups, one human and one angelic.

And this is why we cannot proceed with the Trib issues. We do not have common understandings. And I most assuredly am not going to make such out there assumptions, based on the Book of Enoch, in contradiction to the Bible, you have.

So, yes. We are at a stand off.

Later

[CTZonEdit]

Maybe you need to research human 'giants'.

None of the have lived healthy lives, they are riddled with pain and illnesses due to their hyper-genetics. Their bodies literally tear themselves apart. And these documented 'giants' are only 8 or so feet.

Now you believe humans existed that were double and triple that size? Physically impossible for a human to be that tall. Absoultely physically impossible.

And if Goliath was 15 or 20 feet tall you expect us to believe that David had a chance? It would have taken an army of men to bring down such a being. And Goliath and his mates would have stomped on them all. They could have ripped trees out of the ground, lifted houses caused utter destruction, yet you believe that David tossed a rock 20 feet and killed a 20' foot tall giant?

The rock that would have to have been thrown to cause such a beast to fall would weigh more than David could have lifted.

[CoreIssue]

Maybe you need to research human 'giants'.

None of the have lived healthy lives, they are riddled with pain and illnesses due to their hyper-genetics. Their bodies literally tear themselves apart. And these documented 'giants' are only 8 or so feet.

Now you believe humans existed that were double and triple that size? Physically impossible for a human to be that tall. Absoultely physically impossible.

And if Goliath was 15 or 20 feet tall you expect us to believe that David had a chance? It would have taken an army of men to bring down such a being. And Goliath and his mates would have stomped on them all. They could have ripped trees out of the ground, lifted houses caused utter destruction, yet you believe that David tossed a rock 20 feet and killed a 20' foot tall giant?

The rock that would have to have been thrown to cause such a beast to fall would weigh more than David could have lifted.
Add to that, for MHz's claim the Genesis ones were angels 21 feet tall, body proportions. Calculate out the body component sizes.

He is saying they had sex with normal women. They would have killed any woman they tried to have intercourse with.

[MHz]

Hi CTZonEdit,
Maybe you need to research human 'giants'.
Maybe you need to do some research on 'sons of God';
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.

Job:2:1:
Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD,
and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.

Job:38:7:
When the morning stars sang together,
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?


None of the have lived healthy lives, they are riddled with pain and illnesses due to their hyper-genetics. Their bodies literally tear themselves apart. And these documented 'giants' are only 8 or so feet.

1Sa:17:4:
And there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines,
named Goliath,
of Gath,
whose height was six cubits and a span.

That is about 10 ft.

De:3:11:
For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants;
behold,
his bedstead was a bedstead of iron;
is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon?
nine cubits was the length thereof,
and four cubits the breadth of it,
after the cubit of a man.

The bed was 13 1/2 ft. He could have been as tall as 13 ft.

Am:2:9:
Yet destroyed I the Amorite before them,
whose height was like the height of the cedars,
and he was strong as the oaks;
yet I destroyed his fruit from above,
and his roots from beneath.

Now you believe humans existed that were double and triple that size? Physically impossible for a human to be that tall. Absoultely physically impossible.
I said the waters of the flood reached just over 20 ft. And really, there is no reason for you not knowing how tall Goliath was. I stated that the flood would kill any man under that height.
There is still the issue of were the giants fallen angels and the mighty men their offspring. If these were angels then the flood would not kill them, that is why they are chained in the pit. The reference to 'and after that' is going to be the beast from the pit and the 4 angels that will be unbound that will kill 1/3 of man. The mighty men, being the children of the fallen angels are 'of the giant';

Nu:13:33:
And there we saw the giants,
the sons of Anak,
which come of the giants:
and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers,
and so we were in their sight.

Jos:13:12:
All the kingdom of Og in Bashan,
which reigned in Ashtaroth and in Edrei,
who remained of the remnant of the giants:
for these did Moses smite,
and cast them out.

2Sa:21:16:
And Ishbi-benob,
which was of the sons of the giant,
the weight of whose spear weighed three hundred shekels of brass in weight,
he being girded with a new sword,
thought to have slain David.

1Ch:20:4:
And it came to pass after this,
that there arose war at Gezer with the Philistines;
at which time Sibbechai the Hushathite slew Sippai,
that was of the children of the giant:
and they were subdued.

1Ch:20:6:
And yet again there was war at Gath,
where was a man of great stature,
whose fingers and toes were four and twenty,
six on each hand,
and six on each foot:
and he also was the son of the giant.



And if Goliath was 15 or 20 feet tall you expect us to believe that David had a chance? It would have taken an army of men to bring down such a being. And Goliath and his mates would have stomped on them all. They could have ripped trees out of the ground, lifted houses caused utter destruction, yet you believe that David tossed a rock 20 feet and killed a 20' foot tall giant?

Apparently you have never seen a sling in action, it isn't the weight of the stone wherein lies its power it's power is in the speed at which the stone travels.
You have never even read the account when Israel hesitsted about being 'confident enough in God' to believe they could win against some giants. God killed everyone over twenty for that act;
Nu:14:27:
How long shall I bear with this evil congregation,
which murmur against me?
I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel,
which they murmur against me.
Nu:14:28:
Say unto them,
As truly as I live,
saith the LORD,
as ye have spoken in mine ears,
so will I do to you:
Nu:14:29:
Your carcases shall fall in this wilderness;
and all that were numbered of you,
according to your whole number,
from twenty years old and upward,
which have murmured against me,

Nu:14:1:
And all the congregation lifted up their voice,
and cried;
and the people wept that night.
Nu:14:2:
And all the children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron:
and the whole congregation said unto them,
Would God that we had died in the land of Egypt!
or would God we had died in this wilderness!
Nu:14:3:
And wherefore hath the LORD brought us unto this land,
to fall by the sword,
that our wives and our children should be a prey?
were it not better for us to return into Egypt?

Nu:13:30:
And Caleb stilled the people before Moses,
and said,
Let us go up at once,
and possess it;
for we are well able to overcome it.
Nu:13:31:
But the men that went up with him said,
We be not able to go up against the people;
for they are stronger than we.
Nu:13:32:
And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel,
saying,
The land,
through which we have gone to search it,
is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof;
and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature.
Nu:13:33:
And there we saw the giants,
the sons of Anak,
which come of the giants:
and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers,
and so we were in their sight.

And really, there is no reason for you not knowing how tall Goliath was.

The rock that would have to have been thrown to cause such a beast to fall would weigh more than David could have lifted.
You should probably read about this even at least once, just so you know how it happened;

1Sa:17:40:
And he took his staff in his hand,
and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook,
and put them in a shepherd's bag which he had,
even in a scrip;
and his sling was in his hand:
and he drew near to the Philistine.

1Sa:17:49:
And David put his hand in his bag,
and took thence a stone,
and slang it,
and smote the Philistine in his forehead,
that the stone sunk into his forehead;
and he fell upon his face to the earth.

How accurate can a slinger be:
J'g:20:16:
Among all this people there were seven hundred chosen men lefthanded;
every one could sling stones at an hair breadth,
and not miss.

Later

[MHz]

Add to that, for MHz's claim the Genesis ones were angels 21 feet tall, body proportions. Calculate out the body component sizes.

He is saying they had sex with normal women. They would have killed any woman they tried to have intercourse with.

It only takes sperm, not intercourse to cause a child to be born, neither can you use the argument that the baby would be to big, the growth of the mighty men could have accurred after birth. Andra the giant was 7'4', born to normal sized people, yet he weighed as much as 500 lbs.

No comment about your imigination other that it was noticed.

[CoreIssue]

Add to that, for MHz's claim the Genesis ones were angels 21 feet tall, body proportions. Calculate out the body component sizes.

He is saying they had sex with normal women. They would have killed any woman they tried to have intercourse with.

It only takes sperm, not intercourse to cause a child to be born, neither can you use the argument that the baby would be to big, the growth of the mighty men could have accurred after birth. Andra the giant was 7'4', born to normal sized people, yet he weighed as much as 500 lbs.

No comment about your imigination other that it was noticed.
His mother was not bred by someone you claim to be 21 foot tall, either.

Not imagination, MHz. It is a reality that when you proportion a male's body to 21 foot tall he could not impregnate her by sex.

Absurd statement to try to dismiss this point as imagination. An excuse to not acknowledge that simple physical fact.

Preganancy does not occur by imigination.

You are the one who kept demanding you were right on this.

This IS an issue against your argument. And it destroys your docrine by being physically impossible.

And yea, growing up on a farm I know how artificial insimination works. Talk about using ones imagination to get around an issue.

As said long ago, you are only out to defend your doctrine. Your answer here proves it when you go to such absurd lengths to try to keep you Giant Angels impregnating human women.

By the way, with Goliaths people the women were also giants.

[MHz]

Hi Core,
They are not angels to start with.
Who the gaints or the sons of God. Didn't the Hebrew Lexicon settle that? Defination #8, sons of God equals Angels.
The Hebrew Lexicon defines 'sons of God' as Angels, in Job 'sons of God' could only refer to Angels.

Angels are spirits, not flesh.
Angels cannot reproduce.
Angels could be any height they desire to be, since they are not flesh.
They could stand on the land at the bottom of the flood if they wished.
They cannot die.
Could one angel even manifest into 50 million horsemen?


Goliath and his nation all could, and did, die. So did these Pre-Flood giants.
Sons of God cannot die, once they have children by the daughters of men they do die, naturally at 120 years ole. God preserved some of his chosen to live longer than that. At 120 (and past)years men are said to be 'full of days. Angelic 'blood' could stay with a person for some generations, God doesn't punish after the third or fourth generation;
Ge:15:16:
But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again:
for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.

You know the above were giants right? Fourth generation from when, from after the flood?

You just defeated your own argument on how tall they were.

I didn't give a height for the giants, I gave a possible height for the mighty men, under 21, they drowned, they didn't die by hunger.

You didn't post any verse I remember saying such. You just said there were. Please post it and let us see if it fits here (it doesn't)

It doesn't apply to this but sleep nor food will be needed by these;
Isa:5:26:
And he will lift up an ensign to the nations from far,
and will hiss unto them from the end of the earth:
and,
behold,
they shall come with speed swiftly:
Isa:5:27:
None shall be weary nor stumble among them;
none shall slumber nor sleep;
neither shall the girdle of their loins be loosed,
nor the latchet of their shoes be broken:


[QUOTE]You are making rediculous statments here. The Giants did not surive. Only Noah and his group.
If Noah's sons wives had been affected by angelic marriages their children (when they married and had children) could have allowed that bloodline to resurface, the ones of the mighty men.

And now the Pre-Flood Nephilim were 21 feet tall and angels while the Post Flood were only 15 feet tall and human.

Talk about making unbiblical claims!
Try reading what I said.

Genesis says that after the Pre-Flood there would be more giants. Knocks your arguments right out. They were all human.

The four unbound are fallen angels. Your whole pre-ademic fall is based on angels yet when it come to Revelations suddenly angels were ever only messengers.

So now, to fit your doctrine we have some Nephilim being human and some angels. Some 21 and others 15 feet tall.
You just love to change the Word of God don't you, the above and also in Revelations, the beast is only referenced as AC by you. Any more you care to share?



Amazing when all the Bible says is there were Nephilim before and after the flood. And they were men of renound, at both times.
So they were neither the giants nor the sons of God then. Do you really mean the generations of Noah were the fathers of these, the first time one had more than one wife they would no longer be a 'son of God', just as Adam lost that title when he sinned.

The Bible does not back you.

Yeah right, I'm the only one in the world who believes 'sons of God' are Angels. The author of the Hebrew Lexicon being just one.



And again your doctrine has you reaching outside of and adding to what the Bible says.

The Bible says Niphilim, singular as a group. Not 2 groups, one human and one angelic.

And this is why we cannot proceed with the Trib issues. We do not have common understandings. And I most assuredly am not going to make such out there assumptions, based on the Book of Enoch, in contradiction to the Bible, you have.

Thanks for reminding me, neither of you are willing to try and explain that passage in Jude, forget this post, answer that issue first, for the fouth time.

So, yes. We are at a stand off.

Good, now quit telling me to get a Lexicon when you will ignore what the Hebrew one says about the 'sons of God' being angels.

Later

[CoreIssue]

Hi MHz,

Again, I typed up a long answer, but decided against it.

We can talk again on this issue when you explain how 21' giants can have sex with normal women or how and why angels would produce human sperm.

Ministering spirits, as the Bible describes them, do not have flesh. Looking like flesh does not make it flesh.

The Book of Enoch is not part of the Bible.

[MHz]

Hi Core
Hi MHz,

Again, I typed up a long answer, but decided against it.

We can talk again on this issue when you explain how 21' giants can have sex with normal women or how and why angels would produce human sperm.

Ministering spirits, as the Bible describes them, do not have flesh. Looking like flesh does not make it flesh.

The Book of Enoch is not part of the Bible.
I'm sure that would have been interesting.

I said the flood waters reached 21', so it would seem likely that the mighty men were either shorter than that or the bible is wrong and the flood was not the cause of their deaths. Some would have it that if you put a person in a cage and he eventually died of starvation the one who put him in the cage is not guilty of that death as it was lack of food that caused his death. The illogic of that defence is that the cage is the reason food was not available.

You come back with this reply, and if the reference is from my above post, I have already said Scripture doesn't say how it was done, only that it was. Holy Angels appeared to men in the OT that looked like men, norma;l sized men. Would that same Angel have that very same appearance when gathering the wicked, or dressed for battle against fallen Angels, no Scripture to say whether or not it is one way or the other.

In the OT you have;
1Ch:1:1:
Adam,
Sheth,
Enosh,
1Ch:1:2:
Kenan,
Mahalaleel,
Jered,
1Ch:1:3:
Henoch,
Methuselah,
Lamech,
1Ch:1:4:
Noah,
Shem,
Ham,
and Japheth.
1Ch:1:5:
The sons of Japheth;
Gomer,
and Magog,
and Madai,
and Javan,
and Tubal,
and Meshech,
and Tiras.
1Ch:1:6:
And the sons of Gomer;
Ashchenaz,
and Riphath,
and Togarmah.
1Ch:1:7:
And the sons of Javan;
Elishah,
and Tarshish,
Kittim,
and Dodanim.
1Ch:1:8:
The sons of Ham;
Cush,
and Mizraim,
Put,
and Canaan.
1Ch:1:9:
And the sons of Cush;
Seba,
and Havilah,
and Sabta,
and Raamah,
and Sabtecha.
And the sons of Raamah;
Sheba,
and Dedan.
1Ch:1:10:
And Cush begat Nimrod:
he began to be mighty upon the earth.
1Ch:1:11:
And Mizraim begat Ludim,
and Anamim,
and Lehabim,
and Naphtuhim,
1Ch:1:12:
And Pathrusim,
and Casluhim,
(of whom came the Philistines,)
and Caphthorim.
1Ch:1:13:
And Canaan begat Zidon his firstborn,
and Heth,
1Ch:1:14:
The Jebusite also,
and the Amorite,
and the Girga****e,
1Ch:1:15:
And the Hivite,
and the Arkite,
and the Sinite,
1Ch:1:16:
And the Arvadite,
and the Zemarite,
and the Hamathite.
1Ch:1:17:
The sons of Shem;
Elam,
and Asshur,
and Arphaxad,
and Lud,
and Aram,
and Uz,
and Hul,
and Gether,
and Meshech.
1Ch:1:18:
And Arphaxad begat Shelah,
and Shelah begat Eber.
1Ch:1:19:
And unto Eber were born two sons:
the name of the one was Peleg;
because in his days the earth was divided:
and his brother's name was Joktan.
1Ch:1:20:
And Joktan begat Almodad,
and Sheleph,
and Hazarmaveth,
and Jerah,
1Ch:1:21:
Hadoram also,
and Uzal,
and Diklah,
1Ch:1:22:
And Ebal,
and Abimael,
and Sheba,
1Ch:1:23:
And Ophir,
and Havilah,
and Jobab.
All these were the sons of Joktan.
1Ch:1:24:
Shem,
Arphaxad,
Shelah,
1Ch:1:25:
Eber,
Peleg,
Reu,
1Ch:1:26:
Serug,
Nahor,
Terah,
1Ch:1:27:
Abram;
the same is Abraham.
1Ch:1:28:
The sons of Abraham;
Isaac,
and Ishmael.
1Ch:1:29: These are their generations:
The firstborn of Ishmael,
Nebaioth;
then Kedar,
and Adbeel,
and Mibsam,
1Ch:1:30:
Mishma and Dumah,
Massa,
Hadad,
and Tema,
1Ch:1:31:
Jetur,
Naphish,
and Kedemah.
These are the sons of Ishmael.
1Ch:1:32:
Now the sons of Keturah,
Abraham's concubine:
she bare Zimran,
and Jokshan,
and Medan,
and Midian,
and Ishbak,
and Shuah.
And the sons of Jokshan;
Sheba,
and Dedan.
1Ch:1:33:
And the sons of Midian;
Ephah,
and Epher,
and Henoch,
and Abida,
and Eldaah.
All these are the sons of Keturah.
1Ch:1:34:
And Abraham begat Isaac.
The sons of Isaac;
Esau and Israel.
1Ch:1:35:
The sons of Esau;
Eliphaz,
Reuel,
and Jeush,
and Jaalam,
and Korah.
1Ch:1:36:
The sons of Eliphaz;
Teman,
and Omar,
Zephi,
and Gatam,
Kenaz,
and Timna,
and Amalek.
1Ch:1:37:
The sons of Reuel;
Nahath,
Zerah,
Shammah,
and Mizzah.
1Ch:1:38:
And the sons of Seir;
Lotan,
and Shobal,
and Zibeon,
and Anah,
and Dishon,
and Ezer,
and Dishan.
1Ch:1:39:
And the sons of Lothan;
Hori,
and Homam:
and Timna was Lotan's sister.
1Ch:1:40:
The sons of Shobal;
Alian,
and Manahath,
and Ebal,
Shephi,
and Onam.
And the sons of Zibeon;
Aiah,
and Anah.
1Ch:1:41:
The sons of Anah;
Dishon.
And the sons of Dishon;
Amram,
and Eshban,
and Ithran,
and Cheran.
1Ch:1:42:
The sons of Ezer;
Bilhan,
and Zavan,
and Jakan.
The sons of Dishan;
Uz,
and Aran.
1Ch:1:43:
Now these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the children of Israel;
Bela the son of Beor:
and the name of his city was Dinhabah.
1Ch:1:44:
And when Bela was dead,
Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead.
1Ch:1:45:
And when Jobab was dead,
Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his stead.
1Ch:1:46:
And when Husham was dead,
Hadad the son of Bedad,
which smote Midian in the field of Moab,
reigned in his stead:
and the name of his city was Avith.
1Ch:1:47:
And when Hadad was dead,
Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his stead.
1Ch:1:48:
And when Samlah was dead,
Shaul of Rehoboth by the river reigned in his stead.
1Ch:1:49:
And when Shaul was dead,
Baal-hanan the son of Achbor reigned in his stead.
1Ch:1:50:
And when Baal-hanan was dead,
Hadad reigned in his stead:
and the name of his city was Pai;
and his wife's name was Mehetabel,
the daughter of Matred,
the daughter of Mezahab.
1Ch:1:51:
Hadad died also.
And the dukes of Edom were;
duke Timnah,
duke Aliah,
duke Jetheth,
1Ch:1:52:
Duke Aholibamah,
duke Elah,
duke Pinon,
1Ch:1:53:
Duke Kenaz,
duke Teman,
duke Mibzar,
1Ch:1:54:
Duke Magdiel,
duke Iram.
These are the dukes of Edom.

Now once I sort all these out I will know where those who are mentioned as giants came from. Most likely I will also have a sound argument for the giants (largest in the land) as being fallen angels, after the flood giants would still be the largest in the land but these are not angels, but they are certainly from those who were the children of fallen angels.
The time is past when I will ever speak something like the above to you, any inner questions or thoughts I have will not be made available to you. You have one mission, preserve your own doctrine at all costs, that part is very clear. Another part is also very clear, if your mind cannot concieve something then it is impossible. You don't know some things, and some things you do not know carry importance, not for you, but for others that accept your views as being fully true. We have talked long on some subjects, other than the 'third rapture verse' you have accepted very little of what I have had to say. Rejected not with Scripture but words from your own thoughts. The latest in this is the Book of Jude, you now no longer believe Jude andf what he wrote because it puts your doctrine under stress. Fine reject his words.
Your theory about Enoch is questionable at best, 300 years he walked with God and one prophecy is spoken about. The answer to that should have been right there but you took another route, total denial that that reference should have any place in the Word of God. Well, it is there and as such it deserves attention. Would you like the answer? It has to do with either fallen angels or their children, that is the only hint you get at the moment.


Later

[CoreIssue]

Nope. You have already refuted yourself.

It is impossible for 21' men to have intercouruse with normal women. Dodge or dismiss all you want, but it is impossible.

And by your rational we all have fallen angel blood in us. After all there were only 4 couples around to repopulate the world. So their children most assuredly intermingled in marriage

Your arguments are all self defeating.

You have angles dying when they cannot.

You have them in flesh when they were spirits. And even more so possessing human compatible sperm.

You have children that are half human and half angel.

And the source for you defining sons of God is the Book of Enoch.

Sons of God is not a well defined term. It is used to refer to anyone in a relationship with God.

An effort to accept it as applying to humans, in the NT but not the old demands justification you cannot provide.

And efforts to call angels who have rebelled against God and are commiting sin as somehow remaining sons of God until God labels them otherwise is illogical.

The second they sinned they ceased to be sons of God.

Your arguments remain untenable and illogical.

[MHz]

Hi Core,Nope. You have already refuted yourself.

It is impossible for 21' men to have intercouruse with normal women. Dodge or dismiss all you want, but it is impossible.
Get a grip, the mighty men are the men that would be under 21'. I repeat, the children of fallen angels and the daughters of men are the ones who would be under 21 ft. Scripture has already shown that angels can appear as normal sized men, that is how they could have appeared to the daughters of men. Once the first of these were born some could have also been daughters.

And by your rational we all have fallen angel blood in us. After all there were only 4 couples around to repopulate the world. So their children most assuredly intermingled in marriage
It would appear that any remnant were taken care of on the way to the promised land.

You have angles dying when they cannot.
I've never said the flood killed any fallen angel, their sons and daughters, yes.

You have them in flesh when they were spirits. And even more so possessing human compatible sperm.
Apparently not very compatable if the children are oversized and some have more toes and fingers than what man has.

You have children that are half human and half angel.
That is an influence that could explain why they are so much different and it is more plausable than men and women (sons and daughters of Adam and Eve) being able to produce something so unlike themselves.

And the source for you defining sons of God is the Book of Enoch.
No I used the book of Job to do that, in that 'sons of God' are words written there. And it refers to Angels all three times.
The Hebrew Lexicon also agrees with that defination(remember insisting I use a Lexicon to get the 'proper defination').
The sourse I referenced was the Book of Jude, not this other book you keep talking about.
You know the book, the same one just before the one that mentions angels coming out of a pit and in another place four of them being unbound, and Satan.

Sons of God is not a well defined term. It is used to refer to anyone in a relationship with God.
That it is used so very few times does define it as being very specific.

An effort to accept it as applying to humans, in the NT but not the old demands justification you cannot provide.
Re:21:6:
And he said unto me,
It is done.
I am Alpha and Omega,
the beginning and the end.
I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
Re:21:7:
He that overcometh shall inherit all things;
and I will be his God,
and he shall be my son.

Think any man who accepts this offer will ever die?
None of the Disciples ever fell, yet you would have that in ancient times men could be the 'sons of God' and do carnal things, I don't buy that argument.
Ro:8:6:
For to be carnally minded is death;
but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Ro:8:7:
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God:
for it is not subject to the law of God,
neither indeed can be.
Ro:8:8:
So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
Ro:8:9:
But ye are not in the flesh,
but in the Spirit,
if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ,
he is none of his.

Even the Apostles wait for the day of redemption;

Ro:8:19:
For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
Ro:8:20:
For the creature was made subject to vanity,
not willingly,
but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
Ro:8:21:
Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
Ro:8:22:
For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
Ro:8:23:
And not only they,
but ourselves also,
which have the firstfruits of the Spirit,
even we ourselves groan within ourselves,
waiting for the adoption,
to wit,
the redemption of our body.
Ro:8:24:
For we are saved by hope:
but hope that is seen is not hope:
for what a man seeth,
why doth he yet hope for?
Ro:8:25:
But if we hope for that we see not,
then do we with patience wait for it.

If the whole creation is waiting for that adoption then it is a reference to glorified bodies, sons of God when recieving the last of all that is promised.

And efforts to call angels who have rebelled against God and are commiting sin as somehow remaining sons of God until God labels them otherwise is illogical.
If they are doing anything that is mentioned they have to go by some name, sons of God would no longer apply to them. A man who sins can still be called a man as all are born into sin.

The second they sinned they ceased to be sons of God.
But