Other end-times discussion

[Goodboy]

Might Hebrews 1:5 cause us to question "sons of God" being angels? I found an interesting website that addresses the topic of the Nephilim. The Sons of God Are Not Angels - Proven By The Bible Alone

I don't know either way but it has always been an interesting argument.

That is an easy one. I would submit that the key is looking at the whole verse.

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

Jesus is the only begotten son of God. Begotten meaning born of. The Bible calls Jesus the only begotten son of God to differentiate him from Angles and we adopted Christians. Angles were not begotten but created by God.

The Bible calls Angles "sons of God" in the verses below, unless one submits those were men also? When did men accompany Satan?

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?

Another question is, why would men having sex with daughters of other men produce giants?

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.

My two cents anyway, if anyone is still interested.

God Bless!

 

[Goodboy]

Might Hebrews 1:5 cause us to question "sons of God" being angels? I found an interesting website that addresses the topic of the Nephilim. The Sons of God Are Not Angels - Proven By The Bible

I briefly scanned some of what the article said and I found this. They claim that Genesis 6:4 sates that there were Giants before, during and after the time period when the sons of God had their children. So let's read the verse.

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.

The verse says "in those days" right, but what is those days referring to? The rest of the verse tells us which is "when the sons of God came in unto daughters. If you remove the words "and also after that" it would be clear that is what the verse is saying. We don't get just to decide for ourselves when those days were. Also, why would the Bible mention giants in this verse if it had no relevance?

This is why I highly recommend not paying a lot of attention to something we find on the Internet. The Bible itself is the only truth.

This is what can happen and has happened to some believing what they watch, listen to or read other than the Bible. Look at what Ephesians 4:14 says.

Ephesians 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Ephesians 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Ephesians 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
Ephesians 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
Ephesians 4:16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

More of my two cents, for those who are still interested.

God Bless!

 

[Matthew6:33]

Joking aside, I believe that the unfaithful angels bred with the women. Now I don't know if the angels were in the flesh (like how they were in Sodom and Gomorrah) or if the women were demonically possessed when they were with the men (who knows, many pagan things going on back then). Jude 1:6 makes me think they were in the flesh because they did not "keep their first estate" (spiritual?). In verse 7 "in like manner" and "giving themselves to fornication" going after "strange flesh" gives greater context and support to this thought. Lastly, I think the unfaithful angels sinned and crossed the line that God set for them and He banished them (Tartarus) until judgement day (white throne) where they will be judged (by us??).

[Jude 1:6-8 KJV]
6 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.
7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, 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.
8 Likewise also these [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

[2Pe 2:4 KJV]
4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast [them] down to hell (tartarus), and delivered [them] into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
[Mat 25:41 KJV]
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

[1Co 6:3 KJV]
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

Another thing I thought of while I was typing and researching this was that in Sodom and Gomorrah the men wanted to fornicate with the angels. But in Genesis 6:2 the angels wanted to take the women as wives. Sinful man? Sinful angels?

Interesting stuff. I am always opened to hearing biblically supported positions but this is just where I am at personally with this topic at this time. God bless.

 

[Matthew6:33]

"sons of God" used in the OT.

[Gen 6:2 KJV]
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.

[Gen 6:4 KJV]
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.

[Job 1:6 KJV]
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 KJV]
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 KJV]
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

[Dan 3:25 KJV]
25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. (I know this is the Angel of the Lord but it still deserves mention as Neb in Dan 3:28 calls Him an angel).

[Dan 3:28 KJV]
28 [Then] Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed [be] the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God.

There are also extra-biblical writings from Josephus and the early Church that speak about angels fornicating with women. I think some translations of the Septuagint also translate "sons of God" to "angels of God" in Gen 6:1-4.

 

[RonJohnSilver]

I read through the site that TT mentioned, the Refute It apologetics site. It's an interesting site, I did not see any obvious non-Christian teachings on it. My point though, is this, much of what that author and others say, no matter the viewpoint, seems to go back to the original languages and how they are used/translated. Honestly, that's confusing to me. I know English pretty well, no Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Ugaritic or Klingon. I understand that English is not the Biblical language but I can only follow what I can understand. From a basic, English reading, the angel/human hybrid story sounds plausible, especially in the context of the eternal, heavenly warfare between Satan and God. Fantastic? Clearly. Creepy? Oh yeah. Biblical? Yes, as near as I can tell. As someone earlier noted, it's an interesting part of scripture, thankfully not a matter of salvation. I'll be anxious to learn the real story eventually. But I understand what I need to know, that Jesus died for my sins.

 

[Ghoti Ichthus]

I read through the site that TT mentioned, the Refute It apologetics site. It's an interesting site, I did not see any obvious non-Christian teachings on it. My point though, is this, much of what that author and others say, no matter the viewpoint, seems to go back to the original languages and how they are used/translated. Honestly, that's confusing to me. I know English pretty well, no Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Ugaritic or Klingon. I understand that English is not the Biblical language but I can only follow what I can understand. From a basic, English reading, the angel/human hybrid story sounds plausible, especially in the context of the eternal, heavenly warfare between Satan and God. Fantastic? Clearly. Creepy? Oh yeah. Biblical? Yes, as near as I can tell. As someone earlier noted, it's an interesting part of scripture, thankfully not a matter of salvation. I'll be anxious to learn the real story eventually. But I understand what I need to know, that Jesus died for my sins.

Amen, on what is critical to know.
The core, essential doctrine/teaching of the Bible is found in John 3:16. The next two verses (John 3:17 and 3:18) explain and clarify.
The core, essential, basic, fundamental beliefs of all Christians is found in the Apostle's Creed. Everything in it is found in the Bible.

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 3:16-18, KJV

Apostle's Creed

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,

And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died and was buried.
He descended into hell.
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of God
the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Christian Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

 

[Ghoti Ichthus]

I read through the site that TT mentioned, the Refute It apologetics site. It's an interesting site, I did not see any obvious non-Christian teachings on it. My point though, is this, much of what that author and others say, no matter the viewpoint, seems to go back to the original languages and how they are used/translated. Honestly, that's confusing to me. I know English pretty well, no Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Ugaritic or Klingon. I understand that English is not the Biblical language but I can only follow what I can understand. From a basic, English reading, the angel/human hybrid story sounds plausible, especially in the context of the eternal, heavenly warfare between Satan and God. Fantastic? Clearly. Creepy? Oh yeah. Biblical? Yes, as near as I can tell. As someone earlier noted, it's an interesting part of scripture, thankfully not a matter of salvation. I'll be anxious to learn the real story eventually. But I understand what I need to know, that Jesus died for my sins.

Regarding translation. Traditionally, the various translations depend on which manuscripts in the original language(s) the translatior(s) used, their understanding of the culture at the times and places during which the Bible was written, and their understanding of both/all involved languages. These days, translators and publishers may also have agendas, which are reflected in their translations. One of the most blatant Bibles with an "agenda" is the NIV gender neutral version, which uses gender-neutral pronouns and words. For instance, God is referred to as Parent, rather than Father. The pronouns, he and his, have been changed to they, their, them, etc.

Here is the translators' Preface to the King James Version (KJV), which may shed some light.

KJV Preface

The original essay prefixed to the 1769 King James Version where the translators defend their version against criticisms they expected to be brought against it

www.blueletterbible.org

Here are prefaces to several different versions of the Bible

Modern English Versions | BibleVersion.org

Bibles in the Tyndale-KJV Tradition Other Modern English Translations Bibles in the Tyndale-KJV Tradition King James Version (AV/KJV) English Revised Version

bibleversion.org

 

[Hol]

Therefore as much as there are very interesting arguments on the the Nephilim being the product of demons mating with women I don't believe it for one second anymore. I am firmly in the camp that there is some other explanation.

I'm with you on this brother

 

[Ghoti Ichthus]

For the past 50 years I have gone back and forth over the idea of who the Nephilim were. Did fallen angels --that is to say demons-- mate with human females? And currently I'm in the no they didn't camp. And I'll tell you why.

For the Nephilim, if they were the product of fallen angels/demons, to have survived the flood, it could have only been through the eight people in the ark. Now are we to believe that the Nephilim DNA, the fallen angel DNA, came through Noah or his wife? I don't think so. God specifically chose Noah to repopulate the world without the corruption that existed pre-flood. So I don't think it's possible that He would have chosen Noah or his wife had there been demonic DNA in either of them.

So if it wasn't in them, it wasn't in their sons either. That leaves the wives of the sons. Is it possible there was demonic DNA in any one of the three wives? Possibly, but unlikely. For it to be there would have meant that God allowed it to be there. God who knows everything, every single thing, the placement of every fraction of every atom of every molecule in the universe, would have known they carried that demonic DNA. And further, He would have permitted it. So would He who is able to control the affairs of man have allowed Noah's son's to marry women containing demonic seed? Or If He had, would He have allowed the wives to enter the ark to repopulate the world? Again I don't think so. God is in control of everything and he would not have allowed that. He destroyed the world because of it if you believe the theory,; therefore there's no way he would have allowed the intermingling of demon and human DNA to continue. That for me is the most compelling argument.

Yes, we can argue all sorts of theological positions, we can argue all sorts of grammatical definitions and genealogical suppositions. But ultimately it comes down to God and what was God's will and what was God's purpose. Therefore as much as there are very interesting arguments on the the Nephilim being the product of demons mating with women I don't believe it for one second anymore. I am firmly in the camp that there is some other explanation.

What is that explanation? I have no idea. But I come back to Deuteronomy 29:29-- the secret things belong onto the Lord or God; but those things which He has revealed belong to us to obey and to our children. So for me I'd rather put my effort into looking at what God clearly has said should be our purpose and our behavior towards ourselves and our behaviors towards the saved and our behaviors towards the lost. My sanctification is the most important thing in my life, because from that sanctification flows the ability to effectively witness to others. Anything else is an aside. And a distraction. And Satan loves distractions.

antedeluvian covid vaccine?

 

[Margery]

antedeluvian covid vaccine?

DEFINITELY!!!

 

[Baby Yoda]

I stopped reading most of Drudge years ago when they stopped being conservative, but it was interesting to see their headline today is about "end of world chatter" becoming normal. Was interesting to see.