For a while now I have been reading up on this topic just so that I can get my facts straight. I don’t like to be confused about things or feel like I am sitting in a grey area.
Before I posted this article I made a comment under the article, The Rapture – An Article to Knock Your Socks Off that I did not believe that the Nephilim were created by demonic angels procreating with woman on earth. But that the ‘sons of God’ where human men (possibly kings of their time) who thought they were offspring of the Gods. Thought demonic possession, these Men of Renown were giants in their strength and knowledge. They did anything they wanted and took any woman they wanted.
I then got to really think about this and decided to go and put the problems with this Nephilim story; half demon, half human, monster alien creation, to bed once and for all.
—————-
WE WILL FIRST LOOK AT THE BELOW ARTICLE FROM:
LET US REASON MINISTRIES: The Sons of God in Genesis 6 – the Nephilim
Note: This is an article that agrees that it is possible the Nephilim were created through demonic intercourse. Permission received by Let us Reason Ministries to re-post this article in full.
Gen. 6:2-4: “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.…There were giants in the earth in those days; and also afterward, 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.”
The question of the mention of sons of God in Gen. 6 has always provoked much controversy. Did Angels actually co-habitat with humans, or were they the godly descendant’s of Seth that took women from the ungodly line of Cain.
It has been the opinion of the majority of Rabbis that this event had actually occurred, and that they were indeed angels. Ancient rabbinical sources, and the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ all upheld this view. The early church agreed with this view almost to the end of the fourth century. ( Justin, Cyprian, Athenagoras, Eusebius, also Josephus, Philo, and Judeaus accepted this traditional view. While we should not let tradition be the final say in doctrinal matters we can learn from their statements why they considered this view. What changed this view is only speculated but it very well could have been from an anti supernatural out look.
Today there are many conservative scholars that hold to the view of actual angels. M. R. DeHaan, C. H. McIntosh, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, F. Delitzsch, A. C. Gaebelein, A. W. Pink, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Henry Morris, Chuck Smith. While we don’t interpret the Bible because of their view, it is good to read why they have come to these conclusions.
The Hebrew word for sons of God is Bene elohim. This term for angels occurs four times in the Old Testament in the Septuagint version (the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures ) it’s meaning is always used as angels of God, never of man. Most scholars believe this event describes a union between fallen angels who cohabitated with human females. This unnatural occurrence of combining two different species resulted in a offspring of what is called ‘giants’ in the King James and N K J version and Nephilim in the New American Standard, and the English translation of the Jewish Masoretic text.
Throughout this article we will go through the pros and cons of each view and weigh out the evidence to see which view makes the most sense Scripturally The two principal interpretations are, the term Sons of god are the godly line of Seth (Sethites) the other view is that they are fallen angels. their is no easy solution or quick answers to this question, both views have strong and weak points and good men are divided on the answers. The main scriptural argument for the Sons of God not being angels is the scripture Matthew 22:30 Jesus describes the Holy angels in heaven as not marrying, nor reproducing after their own kind.
This argument proposes that the Sons of God must be human because a sexual union between angels and humans is impossible and leans towards Greek mythology. Since angels are sexless this terminology could easily be referring to godly men (Hosea 1:10 you are sons of the living God ). It is a assumption, when God says “ sons of Elohim” that he is referring to the “sons of Seth.”
The main objection then is that angels do not reproduce sexually, however if we look at the verse more carefully we see Jesus stating that the angels of God in heaven neither marry nor are given in marriage. He gives a specific location, which gives us only two alternatives. Because of where they are located it is a functional impossibility, or that he is referring to only the angels that obey God do not marry. Either way it leaves open the possibility of this occurring on Earth and with the fallen angels that are disobedient to God.
What Mt.22:30 does specifically say is that angels do not marry. Marriage was given to generate new offspring. Angels do not have the ability to procreate among their own species. They may or may not be sexless, although they are in an invisible spirit form they are pictured as male, with male names Michael, Gabriel. They are also called sons of god not daughters ) When they become visible they will usually appear as young men. God made an innumerable amount of angels simultaneously, he does not continue creating them, so they never increase or decrease in number.
We find in the scriptures that angels have the ability to appear as men even though they are spirit creatures. They are able to perform numerous human functions such as eating food as in their encounter with Abraham in Genesis 18. They are able to perform other bodily functions as well, they can walk and talk among us in such a way that we may not be aware of them unless they reveal themselves, Heb. 13:2 “do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some have unwittingly entertained angels.”
The angels that came to warn Lot were mistaken for men and were sought out for homosexual use by the men of Sodom. Angels are also able to carry out God’s plans on Earth by supplying food for man 1 kings 19:5-7 Mt. 4:11. They are able to execute God’s judgment Rev. 7:1, 14:17, inflict punishment upon man Ez.9:1-8 Acts 12:23. There seems to be some change of substance that takes place on Earth that they can become physical, contrary to their original nature. So if they are able to possess a body of a man and can eat and carry out other functions then why not other abilities.
The term Son of God is never used of man in the Old Testament, only of angels. (Job.1:6,2:1, 38:7). The only exception is Nebuchadnezzar who said of the one who was in the fire with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, was like the Son of God” (Dan. 3:25). This was written in Aramaic and he was probably stating this from his Pagan perspective.
The term “sons of God” is used consistently for the angels in their unfallen estate, they are Gods sons because they were directly created by him. When the title sons of God is used such as in the passages of Gen. 6, Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 it is exclusively used of angels who have access to God’s throne. (this is a common Semitic expression ) We find that each time when the sons of God present themselves before God’s throne (which is in heaven), Satan is with them. This shows that these sons are the fallen angels as God addresses Satan as their representative when they assemble. The vicinity of this meeting is in heaven, for Satan informs God that he has come to his assembly “from going to and fro in the earth.”
God questioning Job in his trial. Job 38:3-7 “Now prepare yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer Me.” Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”
Job 38:7 is clearly a reference to the angels united in harmony when they were created in reference to Gen.1:1. It is prior to the rebellion of the angels. Once again this term is used for angels and not man. When God created the heavens there was a time when all the angels were united and harmony existed in heaven. They were together in worship and service to God their creator this is taking place when the earth was first created before man is on it.There is also the Hebrew term of bene elim which is found in Psalm 29:1, 89:6 which means sons of the mighty, referring to man as a class of mighty beings (possibly a more general meaning to include the angels).
In the New Testament believers are also called Sons of God but this is by adoption not referring to nature ( Rom. 8:14-15; Gal 4:5; Eph. 1:5 ). The Greek word teknon means born ones, meaning children who have a likeness of Jesus’ character from a spiritual birth, by being adopted into Hids family therefore ie. they are sons [children of God.]
Jesus is also called the Son of God it is used in a singular sense, not in the plural as sons being one of many, he being the only begotten Son ( unique one of a kind, no other like him). In the scriptures son simply means one possessing the same nature of something. Examples such as son of Abraham or son of man means one possesses the same nature as the subject named. The Greek word for son which is used for Jesus is huios. It is limited exclusively for him, signifying he is the son by nature not by adoption. When the word “Sons of God” are used in Genesis 6 and in the Old Testament; in Hebrew it is Bene Elohim, showing they are a special creature related to Elohim (God), not related to man. They are not referred to as the “sons of Cain” or the “daughters of Seth?”
When we go back to the Gen.6 account there are other terms that need to be considered. The title “daughters of men.” Some consider the phrase “the daughters of man” to be the daughters of the Cainites only. But this phrase does not name a tribe but is a general and all encompassing statement, leaving no distinction of any moral or spiritual kind, it is a general term that includes both Cainite and Shethite females, it is referring to females of the human race (Hebrew benoth Adam daughters of Adam) they were natural descendants. Also the term Nephilim (giants) in Gen.6:4 has an interesting history. Nephil means fallen one, (im at the end of any Hebrew word changes it to a plural, nephillim-fallen ones.) This does not mean giant, or monstrous in size but someone who possesses super human ability in strength and intelligence, not stature. This word is taken from its root word of nephal and nephel which means to fall, abortion or untimely. In 250 BC. the Rabbis that wrote the Septuagint which is a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. They changed the word Nephillim to giant, which is the word most translations currently have (giant in Greek gigentes implies earth born men of great stature Num.13:33 ). This was a significant change which has obscured the meaning even to today. While some contend they are still around in the time of Numbers the giants were not the same species of the Nephilim. Since the Nephils were not Giant in size but in strength, intelligence and ability. The only creatures that lived through the flood were 8 humans, no others. Some postulate that another group of fallen angels returned again , something which the bible never addresses and would need to if this occurred.
In Unger’s Bible dictionary referring to the word for giants (Nephillim ) he writes; “the Nephillim are considered by many as demigods, the unnatural offspring of the daughters of men mortal women in cohabitation with” the sons of god” (angels). This utterly unnatural union, violating God’s created order of being, was such a shocking abnormality as to necessitate the worldwide judgment of the flood.” (pg. 788)
Gaebelein interprets,” The designation ‘Sons of God’ is never applied in the Old Testament to believers,” whose sonship is “distinctly a New Testament revelation.” (A.C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (Penteteuch). p. 29).
Can we find any justification for this view elsewhere in the Bible. Or is it as some claim the story of Greek mythology, where we have legends of titans, the gods of Mt. Olympus (Hercules, Achelles) coming down and intermarrying with humans having hybrids, half human and god. What we find is that this is not limited to only the Greek and Roman cultures, almost all ancient civilizations have legends and myths of visitations from the sky. Are these only folklore or are these legends distortions of what really occurred? We have the same for the flood accounts so it is very possible they are distortions of the true account.
There are several questions that are relevant to this event that need to be answered. First what justification is there to confine the daughters of men to be ungodly women specifically from the line of Cain. Does the bible ever classify people in this manner? If the Sons of God are descendants of Seth what are they doing presenting themselves before the Lord in heaven. Job 1:6, 2:1 “ there was a day when the Sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.” Also why would there be such unusual offspring from marriage if they were all of human kind.
From the scriptures we can find no justification for separating the race of mankind and making one line righteous the other not. We actually find evidence for the opposite. the scriptures always refer to someone being righteous by their obedience to God, by their spirituality, not by their physical posterity or what family they are in. Why would all the Sethite men be godly and all the women of Cain be ungodly. There is no indication that the line of Seth was godly or stayed godly. If so, why were they also destroyed in the flood along with everyone else. There is no mention of this type of distinction before or afterwards. It would make more sense that intermarriage would occur with also godly women and ungodly men as well. There is no indication to confine the term of “daughters of “ to ungodly women when it’s a general classification for womankind. Another factor that seems to lead one away from the two classes of humans is Gen.6:2 stating “they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.” In the Hebrew language this describes a violent taking for themselves, not a good thing. Why would godly men resort to this kind of activity for marriage? In the next verse the Lord says his Spirit will not continue to abide with man and then pronounces the time when the future judgment will occur. All this after their marriage to other humans! When Israel did not obey the Lord from marrying outside their own nation there was never such a punishment. Whether this was a punishment incurred specifically for this event or it contributed to it seems to be somewhat obscured at times.
When the righteous marry the unrighteous they do not give birth to such unusual offspring, unless there is another element to this event. How else can one explain the offspring of this union which are described as “mighty men who were of old, men of renown” in Gen. 6:4. This is a description of their power and fame (their abilities intelligence, and strength far exceeded other men.)
If we look at the affect on humanity from this forbidden act it indicates that man became incredibly evil, where his thoughts were bent on evil all day long and he filled the earth with violence. (Gen. 6:5,13) with this afterwards as the affect from the unnatural offspring of humanity God decides to destroy the Earth. This was such a violation to gods created order that it altered mankind and necessitated a worldwide flood.
Many say how can a demon have sex with a human or have this ability to be physical. As we have already seen angels do change into physical form and can physically help people even though by nature they are invisible spirit beings. The Bible doesn’t tell us how this occurred although there are some other factors to consider. A demon can inhabit a person and give them unusual strength and powers beyond any normal human ability. They can even give someone psychic abilities. So it is possible that instead of a creature becoming visible and physical to have sex we have a case of demon possession that affected their offspring’s. I’m not saying this is how it occurred but it can be acceptable explanation.
Without the fact of their being two different species angelic and human co- mingling there can be no plausible explanation of God’s severe judgment. Which came upon both mankind by the flood and the angels that are now bound in chains. (2 Pt. 2:4-5; Jude 6-7)
What purpose would there be for an angelic assault of this nature? After the fall of Adam and Eve God pronounced judgment on them and the Earth. He also gave a promise that a messiah would come and crush the head of Satan Gen.3:15. What we see consistently throughout the scriptures is a satanic attack to corrupt the line of the messiah. This was his first and probably greatest attempt to pollute the line (gene pool), stopping the seed from appearing. By introducing something foreign to the human race, man would eventually become a hybrid, part human and angel, something God never intended. This would have been disastrous because Christ would then not be able to represent man who was made in the image of God. It would be for this reason god took such a drastic measure to rectify this event.
We should take notice that while this attacked the families of mankind, Noah was undefiled by this activity. Gen. 6:9 “This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God.” He was perfect meaning without spot or blemish, healthy his family was not affected by the invasion to defile the “gene pool’“ of mankind.
With all this information of the antediluvian world in the Old Testament can we find any parallel accounts in the New Testament? Yes we can. We can find even greater detail on these particular angels and how and why they were judged. Without the Gen.6 account referring to angelic beings we are left empty handed on why these particular angels are bound until the end of time.
2 Pt.2:4-5: “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to Tartarus, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.”
“The angels that sinned” some interpret as the rebellion in heaven. This could not mean Satans rebellion, because we would have no demonic angels against mankind today if they were all incarcerated. The question is, how did they sin? It is Judes explanation that gives light to what Peter is speaking about.
Jude 6-7: “And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”
Both of these events are described as pre-flood. Both Peter and Jude place these events between false prophets and Sodom and Gomorrah. Both accounts are in the context of sin and fornication of these cities. (going after a different kind of flesh then there own type Rom. 1:26,27.) Jude draws a comparison with the sin of Sodom and the angels, Both departed from their own nature to go after unnatural desires. Because of this rebellion they are confined in chains in Tartarus. This is a location in Hell specifically for the angels. these angels were involved in such an extraordinary sin that they needed incarceration until judgment day.
In the Scripture we have recorded two apostasy’s of angels. The first occurred in heaven with the rebellion of Lucifer the chief cherubim who had one third of the good angels follow his lead (Ezek. 28:14-16) and were confirmed in their fallen state. The second apostasy is mentioned in 2nd Pt. and Jude in which they abandoned their assigned place of residence to invade another that was off limits to them. the author Jude writes of these angels who sinned and then parallels their sin with sexual immorality.
This incarceration in chains until judgment day gives us further insight of who these angels are. If the sin mentioned in 2nd Pt. were the original fall of the angels which occurred in heaven, then all the evil angels would be in chains, not just some. This would mean that Satan and all the angels would be bound and would not be active today. Obviously this is not correct so the only explanation is a separate event which prompted the Lord to keep them apart from us never to repeat this heinous act again. It seems these particular angelic beings were more inclined to evil than the others that they left their assigned place in the heavens to defile the whole human race. So they could have been a certain class of angels as there are numerous different creatures described in heaven. The Apostle Peter refers to the spirits in prison more than once. In 1 Pt. 3:19-20 he states that after Christ died he went and “preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah.” this preaching was not the good news but to proclaim, announce their inevitable judgment, again we find the time of this being pre-flood.
In summary we see from numerous parallel scriptures that this marriage of Gen. 6 was disastrous for humanity. That the offspring of this union lead mankind into activities that are promoted by Demons. Their offspring were called the fallen ones, super human in strength and intelligence that became world renown. that the legends of the Gods in mythology probably are a distortion of a true event just as they have distortions of the flood. That the Lord intervened with a cataclysm in which only eight people were saved. There is no line of Sethites to found afterward. That this behavior is consistent of the fallen angels trying to pollute the line of the messiah. That the word Sons of God is used exclusively for angels in the Old Testament, not man. The weight of the evidence with the information we have does seem to conclude that the Sons of God are indeed the fallen angels.
————–
Right let’s fix this problem of THE LIE once and for all:
Why does one need to go and see Rabbis (Non Christians) and look at outside sources like ancient rabbinical sources and Septuagint translators. When we have the Word of God and everything we need to know is in there. That is like reading the book of Enoch and then proclaiming that the Nephilim story must be true – even though the Book of Enoch is an occult book. So why look to Rabbi’s and their ungodly sources to find the truth.
1) There was only 1 set of fallen angels with Satan as the head.
2) Are we now saying that there is a second set of fallen angels?
3) Was this second set of fallen angels more evil than Satan himself?
a) Satan IS the father of ALL lies and THE murderer from the very beginning.
4) Angels can’t procreate can they? Nope. They do not have the ability to do so. Matthew 22:30
5) Only God can create. Thank God for that.
6) So are we saying that when the 2nd set of fallen angels came down to earth to lust after women – that on the way down God gave them sexual organs to be able to do the necessary?
a) Is demonic murder (with Satan the head leader of the pack, the father of ALL lies) a lesser evil than the second set of fallen angels who indulged in demonic sex?
b) Are there degrees of evil? Are there different degrees of sin? Nope.
7) The flood was to destroy the entire earth, and only Noah and his family were the only ones saved through obedience to God by building an Ark.
8) God’s purpose of the flood was to destroy the wicked in it’s entirety - did some of the Nephilim manage to escape His wrath and make to to higher ground? (see point 16 below under “It is possible that:”)
9) The legends of men with strength and strange powers comes from pagan stories – not christian stories. If men had unusual power and strength it was demonic. (See further on when I speak more about this)
12) Godly Angels have appeared to men in human form – sent to earth by God himself in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah to help Lot. And they still NOT not make babies.
13) When Satan appeared to Eve, being the MASTER of ALL and EVERYTHING demonic – he appeared to her as a snake, not in human form.
14) No were in the bible has any fallen angel appeared in human form ever.
It is possible that:
1) The it was not fallen angels coming down to earth, but fallen angels possessing human beings who believed they were immortal gods, the sons of God and became men of renown etc.
2) Is is then that these fallen angels (from the first and only group of fallen angels) left their place (where they were cast too down by God when Satan was thrown out of heaven) and possessed men into thinking they were ’sons of God’ and after seeing the outcome God threw them into the abyss… (God would not even let them go back to the place he last cast them to with Satan).
3) Let’s go back to Satan’s first lie:
Genesis 3:5
“For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”
4) The (Nephilim) men of renown were probably the kings in those days who believed they were the offspring of the gods (or angelic beings) in other words they were possessed by demons.
5) Because of deception, these human thought that they gained immortality and therefore were perverse in their thinking and, forcefully took for themselves as many wives as they wished from anywhere, even the fairest of the lot.
6) Sex has always played a major role in pagan worship and the occult and it is still rife today.
7) Mormons require that you be baptised and bound in a temple marriage ceremony to be able to attain to Godhood and a life on your own planet with your spirit wives and goddesses where you will enjoy endless sex and spawn millions of spirit children.
8) There was no second falling away, or angels coming down to earth – it was purely possession that took place; deception and lies from the first and only lot of fallen angels who deceived men on earth into thinking they were offspring of the gods (sons of god)
Genesis 6:1-4
1 WHEN MEN began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them,
2 The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair, and they took wives of all they desired and chose.
3 Then the Lord said, My Spirit shall not forever dwell and strive with man, for he also is flesh; but his days shall yet be 120 years.
4 There were giants on the earth in those days–and also after ward–when the sons of God lived with the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
9) Nephilim or fallen ones, does not mean giant, or monstrous in size but someone who possesses super human ability in strength and intelligence, not stature.
a) They were giants in power and in strength
b) This is very well possible where mythology arose in pagan religions regarding these ‘men on renown’
c) As we well know pagan stories are very much over-exaggerated based on occult lies, giant men with powers and strength etc, etc, like Hercules
10) This is exactly what Satan is going to do in the end times when he takes complete possession of the Antichrist (a man) who has given himself over completely to be possessed.
Revelations 13:2-7
“2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. 3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. 4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? 5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. 6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.”
10) Nimrod was an anti-type and an example of the last and final Antichrist to come. He wielded this same kind of demonic power, was most evil, inhumane, barbaric, lustful, immoral and he to thought he was a god.
11) Today we have the Latter Rain teaching of the twisted scripture of the “manifestation of the Sons of God” where mankind will become gods.
12) Occult /New Age / Spiritualism teach the same thing, that you will transcend and become a god
14) and many other religions too…
15) After Jesus was crucified He went down into prison and PREACHED to those who died during the days of Noah, those who were disobedient when the flood came:
1 Peter 3:18-20
18For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 19By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
16) Today (after the flood) we still have people who think they are the (sons of God) or will become a son of God, or just a god, or who will transcended to a higher godly level and because of this sin (the sin that Satan wooed Eve with in the garden of Eden – and received knowledge) men become perverse and murderous in nature.
Genesis 6:4
“4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also after ward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”
Now this leaves us with David and Goliath and the Philistines. The Philistines were big men, Giants – but not from the Nephilim – just a race of giants, also an evil bunch of people.
This whole alien thing is a deception. It’s a lie. There is no such thing as the Nephilim as being a race of hybrid humans (half demon, half human). It’s nothing but a bunch of people who thought they were the offspring of Gods due to demonic possession and ended up in pagan stories as men of renown due to their strength and knowledge.
{Note: Thanks to Thomas for helping me out on this one a while back already}
————–
Just an interesting article followed this one:
A few days after writing this, here in South Africa, a photo was sent to the Rapport newspaper by a women who captured ’Christ’ in the sky at Mossel Bay using her cell phone camera. (There is also another picture of a red trumpet sticking out the clouds as well): I posted an article on this here: Mystery ‘Christ blowing his trumpet’ at Mossel Bay has been Identified and did some research on the church people who believe this vision to be ’Christ’ and a sign of the end times.
The church group is called the Second 8th Week and they base their entire gospel on the Book of Enoch. The Book of Enoch is supposedly a godly book, written explaining the days of Noah and when Enoch walked the earth. During the days of Noah there were people called the Nephilim who were supposed to have been birthed out of demons having sex with human women. God destroyed the earth with a flood to rid the earth of it’s wickedness. Notice that the occult book will tell you the Nephilim were created from demons and human women fornicating. The Bible on the other hand gives the TRUTH on the matter.
I appreciate this most thorough investigation of the Nephilim subject, but fail to see the guarantee that it could not happen again. The angelic act seems to have been repeated after the flood in Joshua’s time. Might other fallen angels also succumb?
John Owens
It was repeated? Really?
I dunno, I don’t think it could happen again for Jesus Christ was born in the flesh and rose in the flesh and will come again in the flesh. If the main aim was to try destroy the birth of Jesus, then doing it again is pointless. Also it says that these fallen angels are chained till the end – this makes me believe they can’t do it again.
Principalities of evil currently rule the air, in the rapture article I posted the author of the article (not me) maintains that the fallen angels will leave their current position in the atmosphere and be thrust to earth. I do not plan on being here, because the rapture of the church needs to take place (The Holy Spirit is th the restrainer, and because the Holy Spirit abides in us we are taken away to abide with the Lord forever.)
I can’t see how demons can manifest themselves physically on earth, as this would mean something utterly ghastly could take place. Then again, after realising that the Nephilim were genuinely half man half ‘fallen’ angel… anything is possible.
I pray it’s not true and that it can’t happen again. But Jesus does say that the last days will be UNLIKE anything known to man since the beginning, that it will be that terrible and our minds wont be able to comprehend it. This topic is a biblical topic and maybe, it might open people’s eyes more to the fact that born again Christians, the body of Christ can NOT be around during this time – therefore we will be caught up before the Anti-Christ reveals himself completely – the anti-Christ is on course Satan so…. why not have his minions on earth with him. Oh boy.
Ok, from the first sentence to my last I have gone from it ‘can’t happen again’ to ‘it’s highly possible’. Hmmm
[Note to all: I put this topic up for interest sake, not cos it actually pertains to exposing false teachers, explaining salvation and repentance of sin and living a life that is holy and pleasing to God, which is what my blog is all about. I struggled with this topic and in my rapture article actually said that I don't believe the Nephilim were created from angels procreating with humans. Then I went and did thorough research, checked scripture and was a bit dumb founded to find that it is so...]
Deborah, this is an “in time article”! When one listen around, people speak a lot about angels, they speak even more TO the angels and even ordering them around… which is not Scriptural. I’m working on a doc I’ll send through to you as soon as finished.
C
Great stuff. My email box is waiting in anticipation.
If the fallen angels who supposedly had sex with the daughters of men to produce their evil offspring, as the author suggests, are now in Tartarus and consequently are unable to repeat their heinous deed ever again and if the fallen angels who are presently still roaming the earth are a lesser evil breed than they and therefore are able to control their alleged evil sexual desires, what does that make of Satan, the chief fallen angel of them all – a lesser evil demon or a castrated one? Have you ever heard of the degrees of comparison of “evil?” The author seems to think the degrees of comparison of evil are “satanic evil,” “sexless evil, “Tartarus evil.” when he makes one of the weirdest statements I have ever heard: “It seems these particular angelic beings were more inclined to evil than the others that they left their assigned place in the heavens to defile the whole human race. So they could have been a certain class of angels as there are numerous different creatures described in heaven.” Really!!! More inclined to evil than Satan, the father of all lies and a murderer from the beginning? Unless, of course, demonic murder is a lesser evil than demonic sex.
What does the author mean when he says “when they left their assigned place in the heavens to defile the whole human race?” As far as I recall Satan was the every first fallen cherub to leave his assigned place in the heavens when he appeared to Eve in the form of a serpent in the Garden of Eden. Surely that ought to make him more inclined to evil than all the others but voila! . . . he is sill with us, boots and all.
The author’s eisegesis of Matthew 22:30 is rather strange. In his view the “location” determines the meaning of the verse. Fallen angels do not marry in heaven and therefore cannot procreate in heaven; they cannot reproduce their own species in heaven. And yet they are quite capable of taking on the form of a young man and perform all the functions of a normal human being, including sexual intercourse. Of all the instances in the Bible the author mentions to corroborate the fact that angels have the ability to change their form from a non-physical spirit being to a physical being with a body, they never once refer to fallen angels. I have yet to be convinced that fallen angels, like the good angels, also appeared in bodily form to human beings. I may be wrong, but can you show me a single instance in the Bible where a fallen angel appeared to man in human form? Yes! the devil appeared to Eve in the form of a serpent. Why didn’t he appear to her in the form a a man?
Are the angels who are presently bound in Tartarus non physical beings who allegedly had sex with women on earth or are they human beings who believed they were immortal gods, possessed by fallen angels? I contend that they are the latter because Peter asserts that false prophets will taste the same judgment as the rebellious angels, which suggests that false prophets are possessed by fallen angels as well, and we all know that false doctrines are likened to harlotry in the Bible.
Hi Thomas
I agree, I think that’s why I posted this article because I need more explaining here too. Cos this certainly does baffle me and has for a long time.
1) There was only 1 set of fallen angels, with satan as head and 1/3 angels following
2) When and why did the second set get the urge to jump ship as well? And what is this 2nd fall not mentioned in detail.
3) As you say they can’t procreate in heaven how can they do so on hearth
4) After the Flood we have David and Goliath? Goliath was a giant? Where did he come from? Tread water for 40 days lol. In fact all the Philistines where giants.
5) I was always under the impression that the ‘sons of God’ were righteous men of God who took for themselves wives that God disapproved of and the offspring were evil.
6) Why has it not happened again since?
7) Some say this could happen again, where demons come down (during great trib) have sex with woman and produce evil offspring.
I don’t see the logic in this.
Thomas, any great theories on this one?
Let’s assume that the angels in heaven are sexless and cannot reproduce little baby angels (according to Jesus in Matthew 22:30) but that fallen angels who have capitulated their assigned place in the heavens developed the ability to have sex with women on earth. In short:
* angels in heaven have no ability to reproduce;
** angels who lost their assigned place in heaven developed the ability to reproduce on earth.
Furthermore, if these fallen angels took upon themselves the human form of a young man to have sex with women, was their transformation something God brought about or was it something they themselves accomplished? Was it God who changed them from sexless non-physical spirit beings to physical beings with male sexual organs or did they have the ability to recreate themselves. I really don’t think God, the only Person who is able to create and recreate, would have done such a preposterous thing. That leaves the fallen angels with the weird job of recreating themselves into humans with sexual organs, which is even more preposterous. Those who believe that the Nephilim were the offspring of fallen angels and women on earth must of necessity believe that the fallen angels were capable of recreating themselves from sexless beings to young men with sexual organs. PREPOSTEROUS!
But what about the angels who appeared to men in human form? We must remember that Jesus said “For in the resurrection . . .” I believe that the good angels appeared to men in a resurrected form of the human body. In other words they were sexless and did not have the ability to reproduce little babies of their own kind. Therefore, the authors statement “So if they are able to possess a body of a man and can eat and carry out other functions then why not other abilities” is rather forced.
My question is: If the angels who are in God’s presence commit sin, what is humanity’s chance of remaining faithful “For we walk by faith, not by sight” Do/ did angels also sin after their own lusts???
Hi Thomas
I should have just asked you before posting this article lol. This is exactly what I had been thinking all a long, but then got side tracked and ended up believing this stuff to be true.
But maybe a good thing has happened there. Because of those Second 8th Week cult people who saw a vision at mosselbay recently and subsequently finding out they believed in the Book of Enoch. This re-opened this nephilim thing for me again as actually being what I originally thought it was: That the ‘sons of God’ were righteous men who took for themselves ungodly wives.’ It’s not demonic.
Ok I am going to edit the top of this article again and add in my throughts.
Thank you Thomas.
Fanie
I agree. I made a big boo boo posting this article. Well maybe not really such a big mistake. I will now use this article to crack open this nephilim story wide open once and for all as being false. The ‘sons of God’ were men of god (humans) not fallen angels.
Hi Deborah!
No sweat, lol. Please don’t believe everything I say or write without testing it in the light of God’s Word. I know many Christians whom I dearly love who believe that the fallen angels had sex with the daughters of men. Most of them have adopted it because they heard their own spiritual mentors say and preach it without really taking the time to read the Bible again and again and again, mixed with a little common sense.
I think the best way to approach the whole theme of the Nephilim is to read it against the backdrop of Satan’s lie in the Garden of Eden: “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” (Genesis 3:5). The men of renown were probably the kings in those days who believed they were the offspring of the gods (or angelic beings), that they gained immortality through immorality and therefore willfully and in most cases, forcefully, took for themselves as many wives as they wished (harems). Sex has always played a major role in pagan worship and it is still rife today. Mormons require that you be baptised and bound in a temple marriage ceremony to be able to attain to Godhood and a life on your own planet with your spirit wives and goddesses where you will enjoy endless sex and spawn millions of spirit children. It is just a repetition of Satan’s old lie in the Garden of Eden.
It may be so that when the term “Sons of God” is used in the Old Testament it almost always refers to the angels. And yet in the New Testament (and in particular the Book of Revelation) human beings are referred to as angels as well. Were they literally angesl or the Bishops or presiding presbyters?
Genesis 6:1-4 is perhaps one of the most difficult passages in Scripture but it could be, I repeat “could be,” that the fallen angels who are now kept in Tartarus were the angels who possessed the men of renown in those days. They (the fallen angels) gave the men of renown their inhuman kind of power, not in stature but in strength (giants in power and in strength). This is exactly what Satan is going to do in the end-times when he takes complete possession of the Antichrist.
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
The men of renown in Genesis were worshiped a gods who had great power over their fellowmen, even too such an extent that they could take as many wives as they wished, believing, as I said earlier, that immorality gave them their immortality. These men were as wicked as the coming Antichrist himself. Nimrod, an anti-type of the last and final Antichrist to come, wielded this kind of demonic power and was thus called “a mighty hunter before Jehovah.” He openly, unashamedly, deliberately and brazenly flaunted his wickedness before Jehovah. He was not a hunter of animals but of men. He was a murderer of men in the same way Satan was a murderer of men from the beginning (John 8:44).
Thomas
Nah you know Thomas I always check. And you know I am good at disagreeing too eheh ;)
Ok so back to what you wrote. Oh myyyyyyyyyyyyyyy word! Ok, ok, this is now really beginning to make sense. I think we need to crack this case open wide open like on CSI. lol
Fanie
It was only Satan committed sin in the presence of God. 1/3 Angels followed Satan out of heaven. As they left they were changed into nothing but evil. Satan’s sin was wanting to be God.
Now hows this for a question. Do you think there is still free will in heaven? And how much more so do you think God seeks faithful children who will stay with Him forever :) I think this is why God is very strict when it comes to being lukewarm.
I am busy studying the Fallen Angels and I have a problem with this.
Assuming we are raptured tomorrow, the earth then goes into the 7 year tribulation period. How then will these Fallen ones take to them the daughters as their off spring will be 7 years old when Jesus returns again. It does not make sense. I dont see it happeing again.
Louise
It won’t because there were no fallen angels taking human wifes and creating funny looking offspring back in the OT. After much research and talking to others on this, we have come to the conclusion that this is a very twisted part of scripture. So this wont happen during the trib. It’s impossible because that means demonic children will be born with no free will to choose, and what happens to these children after the trib?
So you are right it makes no sense cos it’s the wrong interpretation of the OT that is being used to bring occult lies further on down the line through the likes of Chuck Missler and pals.
Wow, isn’t that refreshing to know :)))
In fact I need to go and comment about this under my Rapture article. As I feel this is very very important to understand. I myself as I said above at the beginning of the article that I fell for this story. But things just didn’t make sense, now it all makes sense, because the version given of the ‘sons of God’ taking many wives producing demonic off spring is wrong. And now that that problem has been cleared up, the rest of what these people say is completely null and void.
Thank you for that. I must admit I have printed your page for my evening bible study. Which I do with Hubby. We begin at 4 and talk till late late. I just cannot get enough of GODS word. Its addictive for us.
louise
You don’t have to admit anything lol. Just test and weigh everything, and look more closely at Chuck Missler – you need to use a bigger magnifine glass for him. He supports this nephilim theroy to the max and the bible code which is occult.
Just confirmation for you Debs, most of these people you mention on your site have been a thorn in my side and GOD has always made sure that I did not follow them. He has been true to his promise and has watched over me. I am so grateful I never saw man as a big deal in my life, no matter what message he had from the pulpit. I follow no man, church or denomination. I FOLLOW JESUS. I am not in awe of man. You must come under a lot of “Flack”, but dont give it. Its all worth it.
Ah ok yes the bible code is an occult. I need to do some homework myself. Perhaps those issues I had with him personally are what I need to look at. Thanks for that.
And I shall also ask the Holy Spirit to guide me on this site. Please dont take this personally but we are at the end times and many times my hubby and I say, have we missed the boat but as we seek only GODS truth I dont believe we have.
louise
No I don’t take things personally. And nope you have not missed the boat. I just like to make sure that people actually ‘read’ when they read stuff, if you know what I mean. Sometimes we read stuff but miss things.
Thomas, and Deborah and others,
This subject I think is a little like arguing about how many angels can sit on the point of a needle, but we do need to be careful to be ‘Berean’ in our approach to everything the Bible says, even the obscure things. The only other thing I would say at the outset, is that Jude warns us to be extremely cautious in what we say about or to angels of either kind. The WoF and NAR preachers would do well to consider that even Michael the archangel was not disrespectful to the Devil, who outranked him in the angelic order, but said; “the Lord rebuke you.”
I’m probably going to be shot down, but I think there are some objections to the article at the top that are not necessarily the nails in the coffin that they seem. I’m also reluctant to just toss out ALL the teachings of someone on the basis of the fact that something they say is also something an apostate false prophet like Rick Joyner says.
Seeing as you’re probably all reaching for marshmallow guns (as per ‘burning lamp’), let me give an example:-
I’m sure that Rick Joyner would SAY that Jesus is Lord, and that the Bible is the Word of God, and that Jesus is the only name by which we may be saved. The fact that he adds a lot of other rubbish and/or means different things to us when he makes these statements that we also make, does not mean that we should stop making the true statements ourselves, that would be foolish. Just because false prophets speak truth to which they add some leaven, doesn’t mean we should stop believing the truth, just that we rightly divide the Word of God and get rid of the leaven, yes?
Thomas, I don’t see that you have argued your case entirely from the scripture, but more from attacking statements which I agree could have been better phrased, but weren’t. For example, You rightly ask about fallen angels being more ‘evil’ than Satan and by implication ask why Satan didn’t do this himself? Good point, the author should have expressed himself better.
I think that the impression he gives by that phrasing is too simplistic, please bear with me and I will try to put a better case that is just as logical as yours. As with the Calvinist/Arminian debate, the real Truth lies somewhere in the middle of two extremes that are more about poor application of logic, than anything else. (See my comment on the thread; “John MacArthur, I pray this is NOT true!”).
Okay, let’s look at the objections Thomas has raised and see if they are as ironclad as a few seem to think. Please know my purpose is not to be argumentative, but to seek the Truth above all things.
I believe from the Bible itself that Satan is the most intelligent created being. He was the “anointed cherub”, according to Ezekiel 28:11-19, which means that God actually must have ‘anointed’ him for some special purpose. There is some indication in scripture that he was the channel of all the praise to God by the other angels and I’ve heard it taught that this is one of the reasons that music and worship have been so corrupted by him in these days. Maybe, but I digress.
Incidentally, in this passage God tells the prophet to address these words to the king of Tyrus, which creates a problem, because there was such a king, so who is God talking to? The only acceptable answer to that question is that He is addressing Satan, because it’s for sure that the human king of Tyrus never had all the attributes spoken of here! This is an example of an earthly person, being figuratively used by God to represent some one else in the words of prophecy, namely Satan.
While Satan exceeds all other creatures in evil, he is also the most intelligent, so it is not a given that he himself would do something that will probably end with his incarceration in Tartarus (also known as the abyss).
(Sorry Thomas, but Tartarus, is reserved for fallen angels, while hell is for unregenerate humans, while pre-cross saints went to paradise. I can provide scripture, but this is going to be a long post already. If you wish, I’ll post on that subject later)
If he has subordinates to try it for him and God acts that way with them, which I believe He did, Satan himself is still free to do his worst. He is the most evil, but that doesn’t mean he will always do things that are most evil from our point of view.
You’re all going WHAT???!, but think about this for a minute; no-one would say that Mother Theresa was as evil as Hitler, would they? but her false gospel probably sent and will send more people to hell than Hitler ever dreamed of doing. It’s about perspectives folks! From God’s perspective, Mother Theresa’s works were probably more evil than Hitler’s, from our perspective, on the face of things, it’s the other way around.
Now, Hitler was purposefully evil, while Mother Theresa was deceived and believed she was pleasing God. Which one is the more evil of the two? See the difference? Does that mean God will let Mother Theresa off the hook? NOT FOR A SECOND. The end result will be the same for both people, but the motivation was vastly different.
We must be very careful not to try to reduce Truth down to ten second sound bites, or single sentence aphorisms. Sometimes it IS complicated.
Okay, so there is nothing to say that Satan couldn’t have quite easily ordered subordinate demons to do just what the article above says, knowing that God’s response is probably going to be pretty drastic, but prepared to lose a few to chance. Satan doesn’t know everything, but he’s not stupid either. He has tried many times throughout history to obliterate the Jews so that God’s purposes would be thwarted, but hasn’t succeeded. He keeps trying though. I don’t think he does these things to win, so much as to take as many of us with him as he can, sort of scorched earth policy. I may be wrong, no-one really can know what he thinks, or all that he is capable of, physically or otherwise, just the little that the Bible tells us, which is more than enough for me!
Moving on, there is no problem with grades of evil really. We all know that there is no sin that is too small to keep us from God if we don’t confess and ask forgiveness right? Good. That does NOT mean that there is no difference at all between the sin of the boy who steals cookies from the pantry and the sin of the paedophile who molests him. That is the cry of many today regarding homosexuality; they say all sins are equal, which in a sense they are, but the Bible clearly highlights homosexuality as being “against nature” and there are some sins that are looked on by God as worse than others. The unrepentant cookie thief is in the same danger of judgement as the murderer, but please don’t tell me that there’s no difference in God’s eyes between the two sins, that’s just silly.
Jesus gives three different grades of sin and the judgement meted out for them in Matthew 5:22.
I’m trying to shorten this a bit, because it’s already too long, but I want to address everything.
The passage in Matthew doesn’t mention procreation at all. In fact, it is actually more focussed on those humans who get there and it just says that they don’t get married, but are as the angels in heaven.
If you take this to mean that we will be exactly like the angels, you have a problem, because there are no female angels, so logically, we will all be male in heaven (Sorry ladies). I think you need to be VERY careful reading things into scripture, that aren’t there. As for angels not marrying, this makes sense seeing as the Bible clearly delineates all angels as being male (so there must be male attributes) and procreation would be impossible (as well as an abomination!). There is nothing wrong with the logic of angels eating and having corporeal bodies on earth, so therefore being capable of other human physical behaviour. There is also no requirement for God to furnish them with physical attributes, if they are going to take on fleshly bodies for some task, then the bodies will be just that; physical bodies. There is no information in the scriptures on what mechanisms there may be for angels (whether fallen, or otherwise) to put on fleshly bodies, but the Bible does say that it can and does happen. Thomas’s statement that those who hold to the “Sons of God” being fallen angels MUST believe that God actively helped them out is NOT logically required at all, although it’s an elegant try. ;-)
God allows Satan and his followers the rule of this earth. Deborah, you yourself have pointed this out, quoting the passage in Luke 4:6 where Satan tells Jesus; “…for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.”
There is also no logical requirement for this to be going on again now, because those beings have been bound, ’til they are released in Revelation Chapter 9. (That is, unless this army, Joel’s army, is the church as the loony tunes dominionists believe! Sorry, but such foolishness deserves derision). Remember that the demons asked Jesus not to send them to that place when he delivered the Gadarene demoniac? Apparently not all demons are bound, but not all are free either.
As for a repeat of this, as John Owens said, I don’t find that, plus, God had already made it clear with the flood, that he was not going to tolerate this behaviour, so that’s that. Despite Satan’s statement in Luke 4:6, he only has that by God’s permissive will, not because he can actually do what he likes. God can and will overrule him (as with Job) if necessary. Also, as Deborah noted, the Holy Spirit in us restrains the activities of both Satan and his minions, until we are taken away and then literally; “All hell will be let loose”. There is nothing to prevent the anti-christ being as close as possible a counterfeit to the real thing by being also ‘miraculously born’, in fact, I’d almost expect it.
Deborah, the Septuagint was not extra-biblical, but was in fact quoted by Jesus on occasion, being but a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. Of course those Rabbi’s weren’t Christians, it doesn’t then follow that they were enemies of God, they were more likely faithful, God fearing Jews in the same way that Mary, Joseph, Elizabeth, and others were. They still needed salvation, but they were as right before God as any OT saint could be. Remember too that not all the Rabbi’s of Jesus’ day were apostate, Nicodemus was but one, Joseph of Arimathea another, so it is unfair and inaccurate to paint them all as “Godless”, although I absolutely insist that we must maintain the Bible as our ultimate authority and take it over other writings, which are not the word of God.
Just because some lunatics (and I use the word quite deliberately) seem to believe weird things about something that the Bible says happened, doesn’t mean we should now deny it happened, or try to explain it away so as to avoid their foolishness. If people today pick up snakes, tempting God (disobedient fools all), doesn’t mean we can now say that Paul’s encounter never happened, or try and rationalize it away.
Thomas, you ask for one instance in the Bible where fallen angels appear in bodily form. Ahem, but that’s the subject you have been attacking. You can’t take this and say that because it doesn’t appear elsewhere in the Bible, it proves that these were NOT fallen angels in corporeal bodies, that’s anachronistic. The article gives very good, Biblical reasons for accepting that these were fallen angelic beings, principally, that the words used in the original Hebrew are NEVER used of humans. If you wish to prove otherwise, you’ll have to either provide an example where the words ARE so used, which is separate from these verses. It is a very small reference, but then, the prophecy of Isaiah about the virgin birth has been attacked by liberal theologians on similar grounds. I would gladly be tortured to death before denying the virgin birth.
FINALLY, Thomas, there is no reason to say that there are men in the NT who are designated as angels (you didn’t give references, but there is only one word in the whole NT that is translated ‘angel’ and that does mean ‘messenger’. However, the Bible is consistent in it’s usage of words and if you want to make the word angel into human messengers, then you must contend that the heralds of Christ’s birth were somehow human, along with the legions of angels that Jesus spoke of in the garden. It just won’t do and I’m surprised to hear a liberalist treatment of the word angel from someone on this blog. Angel means angel, man means man, so let’s not have anymore of this; “It could be just a man, or men, it doesn’t have to be a heavenly creature” stuff, I got tired of that sort of double-talk a long time ago.
I pray God’s richest blessings on you all, in Jesus’ wonderful name,
Alan.
PS Just because I believe the article at the top to be correct, doesn’t for a second mean that I believe the same nonsense so many loonies do about the ‘Nephilim’. I believe in the rapture too, but some teach that all those left on earth will be damned and no-one will be saved after the rapture. Obviously wrong, but should I then discard the rapture as others teach, citing the above as a reason to disbelieve it? Again, the truth is in neither view, but something else. I think the ‘Sons of God’ issue is similar.
Alan
I’ll read this a bit later. If I don’t eat dinner I’m gonna fall over. I don’t shoot people, I am more a contact sport kinda person LOL. KIDDING!!! hahah
Hi again, I had a little look at the Second 8th week (forth from the right and down a bit to the left), circus.
WOW! I thought I’d heard it all!
Seriously though, I tend to skip these obviously deranged cults as soon as I come across anything that shows them for what they are. Deborah, I see you went to check out that Bob Johnson guy and found out that he has some seriously weird ideas, as did I. I unfortunately thought at first I was looking at something you supported, which caused me to take a big swallow. I came back though and looked some more and found that you had the same objections I did to the Nephilim, Reptile, Lost Tribes, etc, etc. I only had to catch a whiff before dumping the whole site in the trash, so I didn’t look at what the site actually said about the Nephilim, just assumed it would be the “Children of Seth” and the “Children of Cain”, story, or perhaps the “Lilith” legend, which was such a great influence on C S Lewis, or one of the other unhealthy teachings about the pre-flood world.
When I saw the ‘Lost Tribes’, I just switched off real quick, having wasted countless hours debating with BI adherents, who I believe are prime examples of 2 Thess 2:11.
I was so relieved to read what you wrote about the website Bob sent you to.
Quick question; I went to the Gravatar site, but they say I have to use a nickname, user-name, what-have-you, so how does it work?
Shalom,
Alan.
Hey Deb,
Me too! I played Rugby as a youth in NZ. Even tackled Colin Mead once in a training match with past All Blacks at High School!
Enjoy your dinner, I’m long overdue for bed! (4:55am!!!)
God Bless!
Alan.
Alan
Go to http://www.gravatar.com
Go to the login/signup tab and click sign up
put in your email address (the one you use when you post comments here for instance)
click signup button
then go check your email as they sent you confirmation which you will need to activate.
See how far you get from there….if more probs, come back here and let me know and I will help you sort em out.
Alan Heron
No, that is too much and I am calling you out on that one. If you want to make a claim like that, you will have to proof it! You said, and I quote:
Pffft, my foot.
Please forward the x-rays to prove your claim. You do have them, don’t you?
LOL
Absolutely true, I assure you. It was 1974, I was in the first fifteen and a team of past All Blacks came and played us in a ‘friendly’, as a coaching exercise. I was squashed so flat by “Pine-tree” Mead, I could hardly breathe for the rest of the day, but it was worth the pain! My back doesn’t agree with me now though. LOL
Alan
I would have opted for Ballet in stead. ehehe But you do know that there are many preachers you can go to who can heal your back. Todd Bentley for one is back on the sense and I am going to have a field day with this guy…oh man.
Alan
So Pinetree, widely considered one of the greatest players in history, height 1.92 m (6 ft 3+1⁄2 in), Weight 102 kg (220 lb), sat on you? Okay, I will accept that. Sure glad that he did not tackle you!
Alan
Oh my word HAHAHA. I thought mine was bad. Mom side; French, Dutch, Scottish then my Dad came along and added British, Italian and a German. However my grandparents on both sides born in SA – most of my family tree is kinda obscure. I am what is called a pavement special.
Regarding rugby. My dad says you support the country you live in that pays your salary. However he cheats because come Super 14 he supports the Sharks, has played golf with most of them AND he does not live in Natal province! Typical.
Other than that, rugby is not confusing for South Africans lol. It’s a given that who ever is playing Aus at the time we support the other team LOLOL. When NZ and Aus play we support the team who will allow us to win the tournament or we just hope you guys annihilate each other and have minor injuries when it comes to playing us again. England just suck, except when they are playing Aus. France we like cos they like us.
Hey Deborah,
You mean Todd Bam-bam Bentley? The one all those really exalted prophets ‘commissioned’ with those great words from the Lord? Wow! Maybe I could be on Youtube too! LOL!
I think I would rather be measured for a wheelchair! Have you read the ridiculous statement by Rick Joyner about how Todd is being restored to the ministry? That man’s so deluded, it’s amazing that people can’t see that he’s the epitome of those spoken of in 2 Thes. 2:11, but then, I think they are under the same delusion.
Amanda
Er, not quite. See, I played on the side of the scrum (No.6). Our coach taught us a great and wonderful secret, that no matter how heavy or big the guy is, his feet weigh not much more than anyone else, so I did everything they said and wrapped my arms ’round his ankles and down he came! On me! There’s a danger in losing your natural fear of diving at the ankles of a player coming at you with the ball. LOL!
He even congratulated me, which was better than any pain-killer. I am so starved for rugby talk here in the home of Aussie ‘rules’ (I don’t know why they call it that, I don’t think there are any!). But, we get our own team soon, the Rebels!
I support the Wallabies, in no small part because my High School colours were mostly the same; Gold jersey, white shorts, and green stockings, but also because they’re our team!
Alan
>> You mean Todd Bam-bam Bentley?
That be the one. I’m gonna put an article online soon on him.
Alan
Hmmm… that sounds like Robin Hood *rolling on the floor laughing* — Had to show my husband your comments :)
DTW
Apologies to G and U.
Amanda
“THEY ARE OUR FIRST COUSINS ONCE REMOVED FROM BRITAIN AND THEY DON’T TALK QUITE THE SAME AS US!”
Yes, we antipodeans speak either ‘Newzild’, or ‘Strine’, depending on what side of the pond you’re on. Me, I actually speak a kind of mixture of English with a hint of Aussie and Kiwi and a slight rolling of ‘R’s” at the end of words like; ‘year’, or ‘hear’ which comes from my Dad’s Belfast accent. Actually, whether in ‘Oz’, or NZ, I can’t win, because I sound ‘foreign’ in both countries, in spite of having lived in one or the other for most of my life.
Anyhow, I’m happy to have been able to raise a laugh! Think of it as my present to you both. ;-)
Oh, and now I can see a photo of me next to my posts. My apologies to all, I can change it back if you’d like.
Deborah
Hmmm… that sounds like Robin Hood *rolling on the floor laughing* — Had to show my husband your comments :)
No, Robin Hood and his men wore ‘Tights’. Remember the movie by Mel Brooks? ;-)
Alan
Tights, stockings …. socks big differene eheh. justttttttt kidding.
Deborah
HAHA! I surrender! South Africa wins again! ;-)
Now, did you ever get to read my post above? I am interested to know your thoughts.
Alan
I did start to read it and then got side tracked…. will read it asap. Just been a bit out of action the last few days.
Hey Deb, Amanda, (and any other Rugby fans out there),
Just finished watching the Wallabies belt Fiji 49-3. Yeah I know Fiji are better at 7-a-side, but it was nice to see the Wobblies start to ‘gel’ as a team. Of course, the Boks are a whole different enchilada! ;-)
Blessings all,
Alan.
Alan
I think we are battling a bit in the Sevens aren’t we. I watched a game the other day – who were we playing…. Russia? Oh I can’t remember, anyhow, this team was giving up a real hard time. I am waiting for 5 nations which was tri-nations lol. Hey, you mentioned melbourne was getting a team called Rebels, was this for Rules or a provincial rugby team? My aunt lives in Aussie and I really don’t understand how anyone can like Rules. It’s like ping pong. And their shorts are just so 70′s hahah ;)
Alan
Oh, gosh I will get around to reading your comment above later this afternoon. I am slacking I know :( Don’t hurt me lol.
Hey Deb, (does it bug you if I shorten your name?, because if so, I won’t do it)
NAH, the Rebels will be a rugby team, like the Warratahs, Brumbies, etc. I have to say that while I prefer Rugby Union and quite Rugby League as well, Aussie Rules does have it’s good points, it’s just very different, at least as different as Rugby is from Soccer. There is no question that the guys can kick extremely accurately, with either foot. It’s not so easy to kick a ball 40-70 metres and have it land within a metre of a teammate, especially if you have done it under pressure. Also, some of the ‘marks’ taken are quite spectacular. So, while I prefer the ‘real’ game, I have come to appreciate the skills of Aussie rules players.
It’s Okay, I’m used to being ignored…(sniffs)
NAH! Just kidding!
I don’t invest my words with that much importance, whether spoken or written. I try to speak the truth in love as much as it is in me to do, by the grace of God and by the power of the Holy Spirit. I don’t get too stressed about whether or not people read or listen to them, or even if they disagree. What’s important is that the Lord’s name is glorified and the gospel is preached.
Shalom,
Alan.
Alan
Quick one. Debs is cool. Everyone calls me that.
I am rethinking this Nephillim thing again…. it’s really a tough one.
Ahhh we beat Wales.
As much as I do not like Soccer I have to say I am becoming slightly soccer patriotic since last week. I hope no one reads this haha.
Hi Deborah,
I will be praying for you. We are in agreement that there is only one interpretation… God’s. That is what we want to know more than anything. We want the only right interpretation.
Those who diligently seek Him will be rewarded with the Truth.
I believe that the Nephalim are the offspring of fallen angels and humans and that they were giants because two humans would not have produced giants! ! !
That is all that needs to be said and we should not speculate beyond that.
Angels always appear as men,never women, and God says that the angels (IN HEAVEN) do not marry. So the fallen angels took human wives and rebelled against God’s order in Heaven. In Jude it says that they left their first estate and are now bound in chains for judgement
So male angels can procreate with human women, and there are no female angels that they could mate with.That is one reason that they could not marry in Heaven besides the fact that God did not intend for them to procreate.
If they were simply incapable of procreating, then maybe there would have been female angels too because it wouldn’t have been a temptation. Just kidding.
Valerie
I know :) Thank you. This is a very difficult topic. And this is the only article on my blog that will chop and change as I research this more and more. You know why I am struggling to comprehend this. Because:
– Where did Goliath and all the Philistines comes from they were giants? David zapped him on the head with a stone.
– The part that makes me question this topic is. If this happens again in the end times, how horrific will that be? Or will it not happen again? An article else where mentioned that satan and his hordes will be cast from the atmosphere onto earth. But if they are bound for judgement then it must be a given that this type of thing wont happen again. Can you imagine every fallen angel on earth taking women? Impossible.
The altering of DNA is another story. This is man playing with life and surely will be able to create monsters but NOT like it happened in the days of Noah.
– Many use the book of Enoch (a non biblical book) to back this up and people take this demonic race thing so seriously that the Nephilim play a major part in the doctrine of serpent seed which is anti-Jewish.
Oh sighs lol. I dunno…. I am sooooooooooooooooooo confused *sniffs* LOL. But it ain’t important. This is just a topic to speak about, nothing more.
But out of all, no one has been able to answer my question as to how the Philistines came to be. This is a question I would love to have an answer too.
I also know that many years ago in France they found the skeletons of actual Cyclops’s in a cave. One socket in the skull for an eye and their skeletons were huge in size.
Hey Deb,
I have no doubt whatever that there were giants around in the time before the flood. I believe that there were also giants after the flood. This not something I would burn at the stake defending, but I believe
it to be the most logical position on the subject. One that fits well with what the Bible teaches, so it will suffice for me. I can’t believe some of the nonsense that is believed about the ‘serpent seed’ (whatever that is), or Nephilim and their descendants (who couldn’t have survived the flood), but let’s see what we can see in the Word of God.
In Genesis chapter 6, it doesn’t actually say that these giants were the result of the ‘sons of God’ cohabiting with the ‘daughters of men’, it just says in Genesis 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.”
So, before the flood, we have ‘sons of God’, we have ‘daughters of men’, we have giants, and we have ‘mighty men’. The mighty men are the offspring of the first two groups. Giants appear in the narrative to be independent of these three groups, although there is a suggestion that there may have been some some giantish ‘daughters of men’, who bore children to ‘sons of God’, but that’s all it is, a suggestion.
Another unusual trait of pre-flood humanity, was their longevity, which God mentions in Genesis 6:3.
We know that Noah and his family were the only survivors of the flood, after which men lived progressively shorter lives. It is possible that the incidence of giantism may have tailed off in a similar fashion, but being a genetic function, rather than being something affected by the change in the atmospheric conditions.
Many Christian scientific papers have been written about how the pre-flood atmosphere would have been beneficial in promoting faster healing of injuries, longer life, and other benefits, owing to the restriction of UV rays by the waters encircling the world, known as the firmament. (See the book; “Dinosaur”, by Carl E. Baugh, Ph.D. + Clifford A. Wilso, Ph.D.)
As we still (very rarely) get children born with a form of giantism, it’s not so unrealistic to expect that there may have been a higher incidence of these people back when the flood was a more recent event than now.
(Does this make sense?)
I know that there have been skeletons found of very large human beings who obviously lived post-flood, so we know that the legends of giants have some substance, just as we know that dinosaurs from the ark were still around for quite a while and became the ‘dragons’ of legend. (There is a wood-cut of ‘St. George’ killing the ‘dragon’, in which the artist has quite accurately depicted an Iguanodon, something he couldn’t possibly have done unless he had SEEN one.) There’s also a very good drawing of a Triceratops, done by a French farmer in medieval times.
My point in bringing these things to mind, is that while there were some things that were eradicated by the flood, there were others that slowly died out after the flood and I believe that giants were some such.
Incidentally, I don’t find any Biblical evidence for ALL Philistines being giants, just some of them, which would fit well if it was a genetic trait.
Well, that’s my two-cents worth, I await marshmallow fusillades with smiling apprehension. ;-)
Shalom,
Alan.
Deb,
Further to the above, I know several versions of the serpent-seed myth, so my “whatever that is”, wasn’t an expression of ignorance, more like; WHICHever story is put forward.
As for an end-times repeat of the pre-flood evil, I don’t see any Biblical evidence for THAT, just mentions of a conquering army of demons who do all sorts of nasty things, but not cohabiting with daughters of men according to the texts.
There is a faint possibility that the Anti-Christ MIGHT be the result of a union between Satan himself and a woman (so as to imitate the virgin-birth), but I find that also lacking any Biblical mention.
I guess it’s POSSIBLE, but I don’t think it LIKELY, given the scriptural silence on the subject. I’m sure that a claim of a ‘virgin-birth’ will be made, but that doesn’t mean it has to be true!
Also, how can you not like Soccer? It’s the World game! Everyone has to get on board the World Cup Express and sing in unison the anthem that expresses our unity as we celebrate our humanity!
Sorry, it’s passed, I’m feeling much better now. My daughter came to my rescue and threw a cup of cold water over me (Thankyou dear). As you can see, the media has begun to affect my thinking.
LOL!
Seriously though, I do like Soccer for the tremendous amount of skill displayed by top players. To run at top speed, while controlling a ball at your feet and keeping opposition players from kicking it away from you is very difficult. To do so while looking for a crucial pass to a team mate, or for a shot at goal, is even more of a challenge.
Okay, now I’ll just bow my head and await my fate! ;-)
Shalom,
Alan.
Alan
Incoming! The gently lobbed, pink one is for your kind daughter.
That sounds like it could be a quote from one of our emergent preachers. We are going to be saved by soccer!
The world has gone insane and we are hanging on by our fingernails.
Please see Deborah’s announcement top left of page.
Amanda
Well all I can say is that you can count yourselves lucky over there that this nonsense will be over soon , whereas we have the state religion of Aussie ‘Rules’ football all the time. It is even referred to in the media as Victoria’s religion. One of the surest things to get my blood boiling was to hear a preacher start his address (I don’t call ‘em sermons ‘less they’re bible-based truth and most of ‘em ain’t) with a comment or three about ‘the game last night’, or ‘yesterday afternoon’!
Here we all are, supposedly gathering to worship the Creator of the universe and hear the Word of God, and the clown up the front starts off by paying homage to the god of this city!
The saddest thing for me was that most people couldn’t see anything wrong with it and gaily laughed along with the blasphemous attribution of a win to the Lord’s answering of prayers.
Now contrary to what some may think, I believe God has a sense of humour and I’m sure He likes us to laugh too. If you don’t believe that, just have a good look at some of the animals He populated this world with. You have a few over there in Africa, such as giraffes, or meerkats, while we Aussies can lay claim (I think anyway) to one of the weirdest creatures in the Platypus. Only God could’ve come up with such a concoction; kind of a duck crossed with a beaver, with a few other bits thrown in. Tell me God isn’t having a laugh at the expense of evolutionists!!!
Then there are the numerous passages that give us a glimpse of God’s sense of humour, such as the story of Esther. I can’t read that story without laughing. I can see that in a sense the humour is kind of ‘dark’, or grim, but it’s still funny to read of Haman waiting in the outer court for the chance to ask the King for permission to kill Mordecai, while the King is thinking about who he can get to carry out the task of showing Mordecai the King’s favour! The irony is even compounded with the King’s question to Haman and the conclusion Haman leaps to. If you’re not familiar with the story, go and read it. It’s a wonderful testament to the Lord’s providential care of His chosen people, with some humour thrown in.
So, yes, I believe that we can laugh and joke at times, but for everything there is a season. When we are gathered together to worship the Lord and for fellowship, I believe we should be always mindful of Isaiah 6:1-5 or Psalm 111:10, or any number of similar verses that show forth the Holiness of the Lord.
Certainly we ought not to make lighthearted comments about false gods during the very time we have set aside to worship the one true God. I once remarked to an elder in my old church that it reminded me of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, where the priests were offering their sacrifices to their false gods in the Temple, often children! I was told I had a ‘religious spirit’ and needed to ‘lighten up’.
I left instead, even if it did take a little bit longer than it should have to sink in. ;-)
On a lighter note, what do we all think of making the Vuvuzela the latest introduction to the worship team?
I’m now taking cover in my basement! ;-) ;-) ;-)
Oh, Alan, “soon” is such a relative term.
Epic fail.
When pastors proclaim that the sound of the vuvuzelas is the sound of healing for South Africa, then you know it is coming to church soon.
By the way, you would not dare to sit in the church here with your serious face on. The pastor would whip out a story about how he asked his granddad who those serious people were and was told that they were Christians and so the pastor decided never to be like them. [Picture the congregants slapping on a happy face instantly.]
Once again Africa is leading the way. Here we make lighthearted comments about the one true God and slander and berate Christians. In church. It is the right thing to do.
I wish I was making that up. To laugh or to cry. That is the question. [Sorry about that one!]
Amanda
“To laugh or to cry. That is the question. [Sorry about that one!]”
My apologies, I had no idea that Pastors in Africa were doing anything like that, or I would never have made such a silly joke.
Well, just goes to show, we should be careful to refrain from foolish jesting.
Forgive me Lord, and forgive me my African brothers and sisters, I truly meant no offense, but will choose my words much more carefully from now on.
If I may, I think you may not be quite correct in your statement about Africa leading the way, Australia has been doing the same things for many years, as have England, America, New Zealand, and most ‘Western’ nations.
We have squandered our freedom to read the Bible and worship God in spirit and in truth, while people in various nations around the world have been prepared to risk death just to own even a few pages of the Word of God.
I sometimes wonder though if we are less fortunate than such people, because their enemies are at least quite readily identifiable, whereas ours disguise themselves as ministers of the Gospel, making them much harder to spot.
Regarding the happy faces v stern ones, I believe as I said before that there are times for every purpose, so it may not be wrong to smile or laugh in a church service, it just depends on the reason or motivation for it. If it is response to something in the Word of God, such as the story of Esther, or Elijah taunting the prophets of Baal, all well and good, but if it’s from making light of the Word, or telling inappropriate stories, or from uncontrollable urges brought on by laying on of hands (a la Rodney Howard Browne), then all is NOT well at all. But you already know that.
Let us then rejoice for our redemption draws nigh, seeing as we have all these things happening around us, just as Jesus said would happen. Let us also cry for the lost and pray for those around us to be saved. Let us also preach the gospel without fear or favour, ’til He comes to take us home.
Maranatha!
Alan, you did not cause any offense! I understood what you meant. It is true though, that some of our pastors carry on as if the country is going to be saved by soccer. That is just sad. And mad.
Note to self:
Self, send Alan The Primer on Afrikaner Humour.
Alan
Oh Alan you must just read some of the things happening here because the SWC allot of churches have really jumped on the mad band money making wagon indeed. South Africa is being hit by allot of Tsunamis this year esspesialy. Why? because there is allot of money to be made and the are capitalizing on this.
You can read more on Bobs News Desk:
“But Africans are rising to defend the horns and they’re doing it in spiritual terms. “The vuvuzela is a biblical instrument; it is a trumpet, and God expects us to blow the trumpet in offering praise to him,” Jacqueline Chireshe of Botswana told the Mail and Guardian..” ♦ – Cry, the beloved (and belabored) vuvuzela–
06/16/2010 7:12 PM
Homeless people, who are guests at the Moreleta Dutch Reformed church, watch the 2010 World Cup Group A Soccer match between South Africa and Uruguay at the church in the suburb of Pretoria June 16, 2010. Wrapped in large blankets, long coats and hats pulled low, some 2,000 homeless people streamed into a vast church in a wealthy suburb of Pretoria on Wednesday night to hear a spiritual message and watch Bafana Bafana in the World Cup. The guests at the church came from a nearby squatter camp, where small fires could be seen burning in the pitch black, to watch South Africa take on Uruguay, eat a hot meal and drink warm drinks on a bitterly cold night. REUTERS/Stefano Rellandini
http://topics.wsj.com/subject/s/Suburbs/3990/photos/db47b9cae28e4fd69d61fceb623f60c1#photoId%3D0
“FIFA is clamping down on players showing any manifestation of religious faith either in the form of gestures or slogans worn on tshirts under their regular kit. According to APEP, this constitutes “an attack on religious freedom and freedom of conscience”. Sepp Blatter is now so powerful that earthbound mortals are no threat to him. The only entities to possibly rival Sepp’s power are the omniscient, omnipresent deities of various global religions. So this whole argument isn’t really about priests or football players. It’s about Sepp taking on the remaining competition by cutting off their advertising supply during World Cup 2010..” ♦ –Sepp Blatter vs. every religion in the world–
You know we must help the poor and bring the Word to them, but these loonies are boasting all over the newspapers and tv news channels and to make it worse the Gospel is a false Gospel they bring to the poor and that is just so sad indeed.
Amanda
“Note to self:
Self, send Alan The Primer on Afrikaner Humour.”
Oh, there is such a thing? :-) HEHEHEHE!
No worries, it can be hard though, can’t it, working out the boundaries when using the written word? I find that it does hone one’s language skills though, which is a good thing, especially if we translate that into our everyday speech as well. I find myself quicker to hear and slower to speak these days whether in a group or one on one. The Lord is teaching me to measure my words for quality as well as quantity, increasing the former and decreasing the latter, as I learn to listen to what the Spirit would have me say, rather than just trot out the glib, cliched statements of my youth.
Elmarie
Pardon my ignorance, but who on earth is Sepp Blatter? Sounds like an obscure cooking ingredient. :-)
Of course the FIFA ban on religious slogans etc is not unexpected, but I’m surprised to seee that it’s across the board; I find that in practice, usually, such things tend to be limited to ‘christian’ slogans, rather than others.
You know what I mean; you can say whatever derogatory thing you want about ‘Fundamentalist Christians’, but not a word about Muslims of any stripe, and certainly NEVER claim to know THE TRUTH about anything!
I think the only way to find comfort when faced with such things is to pray for the lost, remembering that:- “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availleth much.” (James 5:16)
I’m pretty sure women’s prayers count too! :-)
Shalom,
Alan.
Alan
Yes, off course there is such a thing. It is hard to export, because it is highly flammable, being so dry and all. It also does not translate well into the schloppy English language. It goes soggy, you see.
Ouch. A lesson for all of us.