Genesis Six Again!?

zeke37 · Aug 13, 2008

i gave you the link that has every quote that there is to reference from....draw your own conclusions, but do yourself a favor and read the linked info...

zeke37 · Aug 13, 2008

It is only by the Divine specific act of creation that any created being can be called "a son of God".

For that which is "born of the flesh is flesh".
God is spirit, and that which is "born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6).
Hence Adam is called a "son of God" in Luke 3:38.
Those "in Christ" having "the new nature" which is by the direct creation of God (2Cor. 5:17. Eph. 2:10) can be, and are called "sons of God" (John 1:13. Rom. 8:14, 15. 1John 3:1). (*1)

This is why angels are called "sons of God" in every other place where the expression is used in the Old Testament. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. Ps. 29:1; 89:6. Dan. 3:25 (no art.). (*2)

We have no authority or right to take the expression in Gen. 6:2, 4 in any other sense.
Moreover, in Gen. 6:2 the Sept. renders it "angels".
Angels are called "spirits" (Ps. 104:4. Heb. 1:7, 14), for spirits are created by God.
That there was a fall of the angels is certain from Jude 6.
The nature of their fall is clearly stated in the same verse.
They left their own oijkhthvrion (oiketerion).
This word occurs only in 2Cor. 5:2 and Jude 6, where it is used of the spiritual (or resurrection) body.
The nature of their sin is stated to be "in like manner" to that of the subsequent sins of Sodom and Gomorrha, Jude 7.
The time of their fall is given as having taken place "in the days of Noah" (1Pet. 3:20. 2Pet. 2:7), though there may have been a prior fall which caused the end of "the world that then was" (Gen. 1:1, 2. 2Pet. 3:6).
For this sin they are "reserved unto judgment", 2Pet. 2:4, and are "in prison", 1Pet. 3:19.
Their progeny(kids/seed), called Nephilim (translated "giants"), were monsters of iniquity; and, being superhuman in size and character, had to be destroyed (see Ap. 25). This was the one and only object of the Flood.

much more if you would read the links provided..

SummaScriptura · Aug 13, 2008

onwingsaseagles said:
Yet the book of Enoch is not in the Bible ''I wonder why'' probably because it is a fictional piece of literature, while the Bible on the other hand is God's infallible word.

Please someone instead of using a fictional book to try and prove your belief use the Bible.

It was a simple request, give one scripture that says angels had relations with women. If you cannot do that then why do you believe it?

How many books are in your Bible, OnWingsOfEagles?

HisdaughterJen · Aug 13, 2008

onwingsaseagles said:
Yeah demons are evil spirits, not physical being able to reproduce with humans, beside even in Heaven Jesus said that angel were not sexual beings, and writing it bigger does not make it any more true.

Yes, "onwingsaseagles", demons are evil spirits but that wasn't the question. Do you know what they are and where they come from?

Apparently, writing things bigger doesn't make you see the words you keep asking us to quote to you.

Yes, Jesus said that angels IN HEAVEN neither marry or are given in marriage. And guess where else that is written!?

AND, you didn't answer the question about the Rich man and Lazarus' location after death...what scripture can we turn to that proves what Jesus said was true about both the place of comfort and the place of torment?

onwingsaseagles · Aug 13, 2008

SummaScriptura said:
How many books are in your Bible, OnWingsOfEagles?

You mean the Holy Bible 66, correct me if I am wrong, but enoch is not in the catholic Bible either.

onwingsaseagles · Aug 13, 2008

HisdaughterJen said:
Yes, "onwingsaseagles", demons are evil spirits but that wasn't the question. Do you know what they are and where they come from?

Apparently, writing things bigger doesn't make you see the words you keep asking us to quote to you.

Yes, Jesus said that angels IN HEAVEN neither marry or are given in marriage. And guess where else that is written!?

AND, you didn't answer the question about the Rich man and Lazarus' location after death...what scripture can we turn to that proves what Jesus said was true about both the place of comfort and the place of torment?

The book of enoch teaches many things that oppose the Bible, if you think because there are a few things that agree with scripture that I will be deceived by a book that oppose God's word, then you need to rethink your tactics. That is satan's oldest trick mixing truth and lies together to deceive, You may have fallen for it, but I will not.

SummaScriptura · Aug 13, 2008

onwingsaseagles said:
You mean the Holy Bible 66, correct me if I am wrong, but enoch is not in the catholic Bible either.

So, this Bible of 66 books, when was it canonized?

onwingsaseagles · Aug 13, 2008

SummaScriptura said:
So, this Bible of 66 books, when was it canonized?

Make your point and if it conclude with enoch being the inspired word of God you are waisting your time, there are too many teachings in the book of enoch that oppose scripture for me to fall for that one, prey on the naive, you will not deceive me.

Big Mouth Nana · Aug 13, 2008

onwingsaseagles said:
Make your point and if it conclude with enoch being the inspired word of God you are waisting your time, there are too many teachings in the book of enoch that oppose scripture for me to fall for that one, prey on the naive, you will not deceive me.

Oh gee, is Enoch still being expounded on here? One verse of, Jude 1:14 ~ And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,etc. and people go gaa-gaa. Let's see if we can get the book canonized ^_^

Your right onwings, it's got contradictions to the Word. I checked it out!!

SummaScriptura · Aug 13, 2008

onwingsaseagles said:
Make your point and if it conclude with enoch being the inspired word of God you are waisting your time, there are too many teachings in the book of enoch that oppose scripture for me to fall for that one, prey on the naive, you will not deceive me.

My point is when was your 66-book Bible canonized?

LittleLambofJesus · Aug 13, 2008

Originally Posted by onwingsaseagles You mean the Holy Bible 66, correct me if I am wrong, but enoch is not in the catholic Bible either.

Hi there. My question is, how did the pre 4th century ECF's interpret the Bible if it wasn't even canonized till about the 4th century I think

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7263824
Did the ECFs really know/understand the Scriptures better?

HisdaughterJen · Aug 13, 2008

SummaScriptura said:
My point is when was your 66-book Bible canonized?

OH WOW! I just looked it up. It was in 360AD. That's a whole lotta 6's!

And we know what the Bible says about the number 6!

Rev 13:18 This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666.

6 days of work, followed by a Holy Day, the Sabbath.
6 millenniums of creation, followed by a millennial Sabbath.
6 millenniums of fallen flesh, followed by a millennial reign of Christ.
6 days of marching before Jericho fell
The Giants had six fingers, six toes. (2 Sam 21:20)

SummaScriptura · Aug 14, 2008

HisdaughterJen said:
OH WOW! I just looked it up. It was in 360AD.<snip>

Really HDJ? What council and what list of books?

SummaScriptura · Aug 14, 2008

LittleLambofJesus said:
Hi there. My question is, how did the pre 4th century ECF's interpret the Bible if it wasn't even canonized till about the 4th century I think

Well now, that's a $64,000 question if ever there was one! The way some people sling the word "canon" for the rule of scripture, you'd think the Church was hobbled by not having a formalized one for more than 3 centuries, when in fact the Church's best days had been during those earliest years!

Brain Damage · Aug 14, 2008

onwingsaseagles said:
And you don't see any problem with changing the word sons of God to angels.

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.

As you can see , I don't have to change anything.

But you still haven't told me what you think the sons of god is refering to , or the daughters of men.

I'm dying to hear your version , which I know you won't give because when you do you will have changed the words to which you accused me of doing.

onwingsaseagles · Aug 14, 2008

Brain Damage said:
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.

As you can see , I don't have to change anything.

But you still haven't told me what you think the sons of god is refering to , or the daughters of men.

I'm dying to hear your version , which I know you won't give because when you do you will have changed the words to which you accused me of doing.

I know this the bible never says angel had sex with women.

If it did some one would have shown me the chapter and verse.

By the way that challenge is still open, go for it.

zeke37 · Aug 14, 2008

from Companion Bible appendix 23...

It is only by the Divine specific act of creation that any created being can be called "a son of God".

For that which is "born of the flesh is flesh".
God is spirit, and that which is "born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6).
Hence Adam is called a "son of God" in Luke 3:38.
Those "in Christ" having "the new nature" which is by the direct creation of God (2Cor. 5:17. Eph. 2:10) can be, and are called "sons of God" (John 1:13. Rom. 8:14, 15. 1John 3:1). (*1)

This is why angels are called "sons of God" in every other place where the expression is used in the Old Testament. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. Ps. 29:1; 89:6. Dan. 3:25 (no art.). (*2)

We have no authority or right to take the expression in Gen. 6:2, 4 in any other sense.

Moreover, in Gen. 6:2 the Sept. renders it "angels".

Angels are called "spirits" (Ps. 104:4. Heb. 1:7, 14), for spirits are created by God.

That there was a fall of the angels is certain from Jude 6.

The nature of their fall is clearly stated in the same verse.

They left their own oijkhthvrion (oiketerion).

This word occurs only in 2Cor. 5:2 and Jude 6, where it is used of the spiritual (or resurrection) body.

The nature of their sin is stated to be "in like manner" to that of the subsequent sins of Sodom and Gomorrha, Jude 7.

The time of their fall is given as having taken place "in the days of Noah" (1Pet. 3:20. 2Pet. 2:7), though there may have been a prior fall which caused the end of "the world that then was" (Gen. 1:1, 2. 2Pet. 3:6).

For this sin they are "reserved unto judgment", 2Pet. 2:4, and are "in prison", 1Pet. 3:19.

Their progeny(kids/seed), called Nephilim (translated "giants"), were monsters of iniquity; and, being superhuman in size and character, had to be destroyed (see Ap. 25). This was the one and only object of the Flood.

much more if you would read the links provided..

in Christ's service
c

onwingsaseagles · Aug 14, 2008

zeke37 said:
Their progeny(kids/seed), called Nephilim (translated "giants"), were monsters of iniquity; and, being superhuman in size and character, had to be destroyed (see Ap. 25). This was the one and only object of the Flood.

much more if you would read the links provided..

in Christ's service
c

That is not what the bible says the bible says it was because the thought of ''MAN'' was continually evil, the Bible says nothing about destroying the earth because of the ''nephilim''

Genesis 6:5-6
5 And God saw that the wickedness of MAN was great in the earth, And every imagination of the thoughts of his (MANS) heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made MAN on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

This is why God destroyed the earth with the flood because MANS heart was evil.

You say it was because of the nephilim, but God's word says it was because of the evilness of MAN.

Who should I believe?

HisdaughterJen · Aug 14, 2008

SummaScriptura said:
Really HDJ? What council and what list of books?

If my info is correct, it was Laodicea.

And it looks like they did not originally include Philippians, Ephesians and Romans.

stone · Aug 14, 2008

onwingsaseagles said:
That is not what the bible says the bible says it was because the thought of ''MAN'' was continually evil, the Bible says nothing about destroying the earth because of the ''nephilim''

Genesis 6:5-6
5 And God saw that the wickedness of MAN was great in the earth, And every imagination of the thoughts of his (MANS) heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made MAN on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

This is why God destroyed the earth with the flood because MANS heart was evil.

You say it was because of the nephilim, but God's word says it was because of the evilness of MAN.

Who should I believe?

Actually, your ignoring a very very important part of the information here;

5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every R136 intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 The R137 LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved R138 in F92 His heart. 7 The LORD said, " R139 I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; F93 for I R140 am sorry that I have made them."

***

God had became so angry, that he said he was going to destroy everything on the earth. The nephillim aren't mentioned much in this bible because this bible is the history of the relationship of man and God. The use of the word Everything, covers nephillim.

God stopped, because he saw Noah and he saw that the rightousness of man lived in him. Now, through Noah, he preserved and restored life back to its rightousness.

God mentioned that he was sorry for making everything that was on earth. EVERYTHING

Genesis Six Again!?

IMO...

IMO...

Forever Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Forever Newbie

Well-Known Member

Post Tribulationist

Forever Newbie

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Well-Known Member

Forever Newbie

Forever Newbie

Generally Medicated

Well-Known Member

IMO...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Contributor

Similar threads