Angels in Outer Space??

[HisdaughterJen]

Not of Earth, but of our material plane.

Angels do not qualify because they are of a different plane. They are of heaven, not of our universe, which is our plane.

And yet, they can come and go on our plane.

Space aliens probably have no interest in Earth. They'd probably find our Earthian ideas of them and their "dealings" in our ideas of the End simply perposterous, probably because they have their own ideas.

If we're all created by and love God, then we have something in common.

Zeus isn't an angel, neither is Ahura Mazda, Amatarasu, the Morrigan, Horus, Odin, or Indra.

Whether they are fiction or based on a fallen angel, most mythology and other religions have a hint of truth to them like the truth has been twisted.

Humans in bodies? Sorry, but that has some heavy Gnostic overtones...Spirits of men? Again, Gnostic-leaning. As a Christian, I believe otherwise.

Nope...all Bible!

Gen 2:7 the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.


Gen 3:19By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."


Hbr 12:23to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the judge of all men, to the spirits of righteous men made perfect,


Num 27:16"May the Lord, the God of the spirits of all mankind, appoint a man over this community

No such beings ever existed.

Gen 6:4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

There are no such thing as giants unless you take certain mythical stories at a literal level.

Num 13:33We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."

1Sa 17:4A champion named Goliath, who was from Gath, came out of the Philistine camp. He was over nine feet* tall.





Enoch which has always been in the Ethiopian Bible canon tells all about them, the whole story, and is quoted by Jude.


[Chapter 6] "1 And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto 2 them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men 3 and beget us children.' And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not 4 indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations 5 not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' Then sware they all together and bound themselves 6 by mutual imprecations upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn 7 and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: Samlazaz, their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal, 8 Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens."

http://www.ccel.org/c/charles/otpseudepig/enoch/ENOCH_1.HTM


Jud 1:6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home–these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.



Jud 1:14 Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones
Jud 1:15 to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”



And here's Enoch:

9 And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones
To execute judgement upon all,
And to destroy all the ungodly:
And to convict all flesh
Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed,
And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.​

 

[Calminian]

Scripture isn't science.

Correct, scripture trumps science. Science is limited methodological naturalism (i.e. material determinism). But if you are a theist (as opposed to a deist), you believe that God not only created the universe, but intercedes from time to time. We as theist believe in miracles, which science cannot scrutinize. Science must assume the absence of supernatural causation a priori or it simply falls apart as a method. Thus science cannot answer questions of origins. It can only tell us how laws currently work, but not how they came to be. I wish more scientists and christians understood this.

No more than your's, although mine is far more likely.

Again no scripture, no arguments, no nothing.

Wrong. The first couple in Hellenism were Gaia and Uranus.

Slow down, Pal (no pun intended), you're getting way too excited about this. Think through what you're saying. Gaia is earth and her son and husband was the sky if I'm not mistaken. But to ignore the resemblance of a man and woman in a garden with a snake is simply bullheadedness. I suggest you consider a book called, The Parthenon Code, by Johnson. I trust you'll find it interesting if you're interested in Greek myths.

And you forget that Greek myth predates the story of Adam and Eve.

Er, how exactly can a myth (a story that never happened) predate anything?

I know exactly what Gnosticism, and yes, what you said implied something of Gnosticism.

Okay? How??

That doesn't mean he's a product of humans and "angels." Nor does it make Shaq so either.

You destroyed your own argument.

Actually that's a non sequitur. The statement that there are giants has nothing to do with whether they were half angels. I think you're confusing me with another poster.

Sorry, but we've proven them wrong with simple observation.

Actually you're confused about the concept of movement in relation to communication. Unfortunately you've bought into the idea that science disproves the Bible because the Bible describes movement in terms of a point of reference. What you don't seem to understand is that modern astrophysicists do the same thing. Sunset and sunrise are not only common modern terms, they are literally correct terms using earth as a point of reference. In fact it is impossible to communicate movement otherwise. All descriptions must have a point of reference.

I bet I could really help you with this issue if you're open. It's a simple matter of logical thinking. You can trust your bible, Pal. No need for backflip interpretations. Straight forward exegesis is all you need. Don't let the skeptics fool you on this.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

More Biblical evidence of giants:

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

Deu 2:11Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims.

Deu 2:20(That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims;

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

Deu 3:13And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, [being] the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants.

Jos 12:4And the coast of Og king of Bashan, [which was] of the remnant of the giants, that dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei,

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

Jos 15:8And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same [is] Jerusalem: and the border went up to the top of the mountain that [lieth] before the valley of Hinnom westward, which [is] at the end of the valley of the giants northward:

Jos 17:15And Joshua answered them, If thou [be] a great people, [then] get thee up to the wood [country], and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee.

Jos 18:16And the border came down to the end of the mountain that [lieth] before the valley of the son of Hinnom, [and] which [is] in the valley of the giants on the north, and descended to the valley of Hinnom, to the side of Jebusi on the south, and descended to Enrogel,



Do you think those fairy tales about "giants" were out of somebody's imagination? Fee Fi fo Fum...many things are based on something real. You need only dig into the scriptures to find them.

 

[Calminian]

I tend to agree with this but there's too much speculation for my taste. If UFO's are ever proven to be not of this world, or made by man, I would agree that angels are behind it all 100% Right now I don't believe the evidence is there yet.

UFO speculations are kind of a different issue, though could be related. I'm not trying to convince anyone that UFO's are really angelic beings, or even real. Whether they are or not, I believe, by and large, that angels stay hidden from humans 99.999% of the time. If they do inhabit other planets and solar systems and galaxies (i.e. The Heavens), I believe they would be totally invisible to us, just as they are here on earth. Angels are only seen by men in the Bible when God ordains it for a specific time and purpose.

But we also know that, while not seen, they inhabit the earth and move around on it (Job 2:2, 2Kings 6:17). Abraham had two visitors that not only walked the ground, but even enjoyed food! (Gen. 18). Other angels occupied the sky such as the Star of Bethlehem (Matt. 2:9). And yet, generally, the angels are said to occupy the heavens (Eph. 6:12). So I guess I'm just trying to find out the need of a "different dimension" type of heaven. Being that angels get along just fine on the physical earth, why would they need a non-physical heaven?

Or to put it another way, if Angels can function in a corporeal earth, why the need for a noncorporeal heaven? If fact I'm not even sure angels can be properly described as noncorporeal. They seem to be corporeal at will.

 

[PaladinValer]

Correct, scripture trumps science.

Wrong.

Science trumps Scripture in terms of things that do not deal with faith, doctrine, and salvation.

The Bible is a book of religion, not of secular issues.

Science is limited methodological naturalism (i.e. material determinism). But if you are a theist (as opposed to a deist), you believe that God not only created the universe, but intercedes from time to time. We as theist believe in miracles, which science cannot scrutinize. Science must assume the absence of supernatural causation a priori or it simply falls apart as a method. Thus science cannot answer questions of origins. It can only tell us how laws currently work, but not how they came to be. I wish more scientists and christians understood this.

Your understanding of what science is and isn't is not true.

Again no scripture, no arguments, no nothing.

Just truth: I know

Slow down, Pal (no pun intended), you're getting way too excited about this.

You really are a poor judge of how people think and feel.

Think through what you're saying. Gaia is earth and her son and husband was the sky if I'm not mistaken. But to ignore the resemblance of a man and woman in a garden with a snake is simply bullheadedness.

Resorting to name-calling are we?

Now who is excited?

I suggest you consider a book called, The Parthenon Code, by Johnson. I trust you'll find it interesting if you're interested in Greek myths.

I'm not into psuedoresearch.

Er, how exactly can a myth (a story that never happened) predate anything?

The date in which the myth originated can determine which myth influenced what other myths.

History is the key.

Okay? How??

I am not a dualistic being. That is how.

Actually that's a non sequitur. The statement that there are giants has nothing to do with whether they were half angels. I think you're confusing me with another poster.

No, it isn't a non sequitur. It is a direct reply.

Actually you're confused about the concept of movement in relation to communication. Unfortunately you've bought into the idea that science disproves the Bible because the Bible describes movement in terms of a point of reference. What you don't seem to understand is that modern astrophysicists do the same thing. Sunset and sunrise are not only common modern terms, they are literally correct terms using earth as a point of reference. In fact it is impossible to communicate movement otherwise. All descriptions must have a point of reference.

You are truly terrible at characterizing people.

I highly suggest stopping now before you embarass yourself.

I bet I could really help you with this issue if you're open. It's a simple matter of logical thinking. You can trust your bible, Pal. No need for backflip interpretations. Straight forward exegesis is all you need. Don't let the skeptics fool you on this.

I trust orthodox interpretations. Not pseudoscientific ones.

More Biblical evidence of giants:

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

Deu 2:11Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims.

Deu 2:20(That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims;

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

Deu 3:13And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, [being] the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants.

Jos 12:4And the coast of Og king of Bashan, [which was] of the remnant of the giants, that dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei,

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

Jos 15:8And the border went up by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same [is] Jerusalem: and the border went up to the top of the mountain that [lieth] before the valley of Hinnom westward, which [is] at the end of the valley of the giants northward:

Jos 17:15And Joshua answered them, If thou [be] a great people, [then] get thee up to the wood [country], and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee.

Jos 18:16And the border came down to the end of the mountain that [lieth] before the valley of the son of Hinnom, [and] which [is] in the valley of the giants on the north, and descended to the valley of Hinnom, to the side of Jebusi on the south, and descended to Enrogel,



Do you think those fairy tales about "giants" were out of somebody's imagination? Fee Fi fo Fum...many things are based on something real. You need only dig into the scriptures to find them.

No such thing as giants. I suppose since the Bible mentions unicorns that you believe those exist also?

 

[Calminian]

Since you didn't attempt to refute anything I posted, and simply just said, you're wrong, you're wrong, followed by a slew of ad homs, I'll refrain from responding. I'll simply address yet another outdated attack on scripture.

I suppose since the Bible mentions unicorns that you believe those exist also?

For the sake of the genuine seeker, I'll debunk this old attack on scripture. Unicorn is a translation only found in the KJV. Practically every other translation out there has it translated "wild ox."

Job 39:9 “Will the wild ox be willing to serve you? Will he bed by your manger? 10 Can you bind the wild ox in the furrow with ropes? Or will he plow the valleys behind you?

This should be enough for most, but skeptics often have trouble letting go of these things. So, for those interested here's what happened. It's important to understand that while the Bible writers were inspired and infallible, translators are not. The hebrew word is re’em, the root meaning being "one horn." But the word is actually not know to have that meaning and jewish translators often left it untranslated not knowing for sure which creature was being referred to. But we now have discovered through archeology, ancient Mesopotamian pictures of a wild ox called a rimu. This is likely the re’em of the Bible. Since the animal has very symmetrical horns, they often appear as one from its profile and artists often depicted it that way. The name stuck as is the way nomenclature often goes. And so there you have it. Another reason to doubt the Bible gets the horn.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Since you didn't attempt to refute anything I posted, and simply just said, you're wrong, you're wrong, followed by a slew of ad homs, I'll refrain from responding. I'll simply address yet another outdated attack on scripture.



For the sake of the genuine seeker, I'll debunk this old attack on scripture. Unicorn is a translation only found in the KJV. Practically every other translation out there has it translated "wild ox."

Job 39:9 “Will the wild ox be willing to serve you? Will he bed by your manger? 10 Can you bind the wild ox in the furrow with ropes? Or will he plow the valleys behind you?

This should be enough for most, but skeptics often have trouble letting go of these things. So, for those interested here's what happened. It's important to understand that while the Bible writers were inspired and infallible, translators are not. The hebrew word is re’em, the root meaning being "one horn." But the word is actually not know to have that meaning and jewish translators often left it untranslated not knowing for sure which creature was being referred to. But we now have discovered through archeology, ancient Mesopotamian pictures of a wild ox called a rimu. This is likely the re’em of the Bible. Since the animal has very symmetrical horns, they often appear as one from its profile and artists often depicted it that way. The name stuck as is the way nomenclature often goes. And so there you have it. Another reason to doubt the Bible gets the horn.

Thanks for addressing that one...that was new to me-I'd never heard of a unicorn in the Bible...fire-breathing dragons, yes...unicorns, no.


I don't understand why it's so hard for people to understand that if the Bible says it, then it's true. Yes, fallen angels had sex with women and produced a race of giants.

Furthermore, there have been a lot of creatures that have become extinct (we've found their bones). IF people do a little digging, they'd discover that we've even found bones of giants.

 

[windjammer]

Originally Posted by Calminian
I'm not so sure anymore. God called the expanse, where He set the stars, "Heaven."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calminian

Gen. 1:8 And God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.


I enjoyed your WORDS Calminian ! Gen 1:17And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
seeing them as the stars as angels in the darkness of night and Gods promise to Abraham your seed[faith working ] shall be as the stars of heaven and sands of the sea shore
seeing the Issacs [heavenlies ] gal 4 and ishmaels here ...............

Deu 4:19 And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, [even] all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.
remember the waring to JOHN and angel said to him I am a fellow servant and of your brethern Worship God !!

Dan 8:10 And it waxed great, [even] to the host of heaven; and it cast down [some] of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.[same as in Job ]
satan drew a 3rd of the stars [angels ] to earth with His tail[ lies!! ], speaking of Job this also makes sense to me the old red dragon serpent of old [ worldly wisdom = serpent ]

wisdom is in the earth and than there is the heavenly WISDOM the carnal as well as the Spiritual wisdoms that war with each other .. what a battle that goes on within and without ...

Isa 9:15 The ancient and honourable, he [is] the head; and the prophet that teacheth lies, he [is] the tail.
God bless wj

 

[nephilimiyr]

No such thing as giants. I suppose since the Bible mentions unicorns that you believe those exist also?

Hi PaladinValer! I don't have alot of time to talk on this as I'm in school now but when someone shows such a closed mind as you have, I can't help but point it out. There is alot more evidence in the Bible of there being giants then just a simple mention of them. Please read this, and this is only a start.

Appendix 25 from the Companion Bible.

The progeny of the fallen angels with the daughters of Adam (see notes on Genesis 6, and Appendix 23 are called in Genesis 6, N e-phil´-im, which means fallen ones (from naphal, to fall). What these beings were can be gathered only from Scripture. They were evidently great in size, as well as great in wickedness. They were superhuman, abnormal beings; and their destruction was necessary for the preservation of the human race, and for the faithfulness of Jehovah's Word (Genesis 3:15).
This was why the Flood was brouhgt "upon the world of the ungodly" (2Peter 2:5) as prophesied by Enoch (Jude 14).
But we read of the Nephilim again in Numbers 13:33 : "there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, which come of the Nephilim". How, it may be asked, could this be, if they were all destroyed in the Flood ? The answer is contained in Genesis 6:4, where we read: "There were Nephilim in the earth in those days (that is to say, in the days of Noah); 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 [the] mighty men (Hebrew gibbor, the heroes) which were of old, men of renown" (literally, men of the name, that is to say, who got a name and were renowned for their ungodliness).
So that "after that", that is to say, after the Flood, there was a second irruption of these fallen angels, evidently smaller in number and more limited in area, for they were for the most part confined to Canaan, and were in fact known as "the nations of Canaan". It was for the destruction of these, that the sword of Israel was necessary, as the Flood had been before.
As to the date of this second irruption, it was evidently soon after it became known that the seed was to come through Abraham; for, when he came out from Haran (Genesis 12:6) and entered Canaan, the significant fact is stated: "The Canaanite was then (that is to say, already) in the land." And in Genesis 14:5 they were already known as "Rephaim" and "Emim", and had established themselves as Ashteroth Karnaim and Shaveh Kiriathaim.
In chapter 15:18-21 they are enumerated and named among Canaanite Peoples: "Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, and the Amorites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites" (Genesis 15:19-21; compare Exodus 3:8,17; 23:23. Deuteronomy 7; 20:17. Joshua 12:8).
These were to be cut off, and driven out, and utterly destroyed (Deuteronomy 20:17. Joshua 3:10). But Israel failed in this (Joshua 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:18. Judges 1:19,20,28,29,30-36; 2:1-5; 3:1-7); and we know not how many got away to other countries to escape the general destruction. If this were recognized it would go far to solve many problems connected with Anthropology.
As to their other names, they were called Anakim, from one Anak which came of the Nephilim (Numbers 13:22,33), and Rephaim, from Rapha, another notable one among them.
From Deuteronomy 2:10, they were known by some as Emim, and Horim, and Zamzummim (verse 20,21) and Avim, etc.


As Rephaim they were well known, and are often mentioned: but, unfortunately, instead of this, their proper name, being preserved, it is variously translated as "dead", "deceased", or "giants". These Rephaim are to have no resurrection. This fact is stated in Isaiah 26:14 (where the proper name is rendered "deceased", and verse 19, where it is rendered "the dead").
It is rendered "dead" seven times (Job 26:5. Psalm 88:10. Proverbs 2:18; 9:18; 21:16. Isaiah 14:8; 26:19).
It is rendered "deceased" in Isaiah 26:14.


It is retained as proper name "Rephaim" ten times (two being in the margin). Genesis 14:5; 15:20. Joshua 12:15 (margin). 2Samuel 5:18,22; 23:13. 1Chronicles 11:15; 14:9; 20:4 (margin). Isaiah 17:5.
In all other places it is rendered "giants" , Genesis 6:4, Numbers 23:33, where it is Nephilim; and Job 16:14, where it is gibbor (Appendix 14. iv).
By reading all these passages the Bible student may know all that can be known about these beings.
It is certain that the second irruption took place before Genesis 14, for there the Rephaim were mixed up with the five nations or peoples, which included Sodom and Gomorrha, and were defeated by the four kings under Chedorlaomer. Their principal locality was evidently "Ashtaroth Karnaim"; while the Emim were in the plain of Kiriathaim (Genesis 14:5).

 

[nephilimiyr]

Anak was a noted descendant of the N[FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=-1]e[FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]philim; and Rapha was another, giving their names respectively to different clans. Anak's father was Arba, the original builder of Hebron (Genesis 35:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]27[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]. Joshau 15:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]13[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]; 21:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]11[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]); and this Palestine branch of the Anakim was not called Abrahim after him, but Anakim after Anak. They were great, mighty, and tall (Deuteronomy 2:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]10,11,21,22,23[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]; 9:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]2[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]), evidently inspiring the ten spies with great fear (Numbers 12:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]33[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]). Og king of Bashan is described in Deuteronomy 3:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]11[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]). Their strength is seen in "the giant cities of Bashan" to-day; and we know not how far they may have been utilized by Egypt in the construction of buildings, which is still an unsolved problem. Arba was rebuilt by the Khabiri or confederates seven years before Zoan was built by Egyptian Pharoahs of the nineteenth dynasty. See note on Numbers 13:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]22[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]. If these N[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=-1]e[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]philim, and their branch of R[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=-1]e[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]phaim, were associated with Egypt, we have an explanation of the problem which has for ages perplexed all engineers, as to how those huge stones and monuments were brought together. Why not in Egypt as well as in "the giant cities of Bashan" which exist, as such, to this day? Moreover, we have in these mighty men, the "men of renown," the explanation of the origin of the Greek mythology. That mythology was no mere invention of the human brain, but it grew out of the traditions, and memories, and legends of the doings of that mighty race of beings; and was gradually evolved out of the "heroes" of Genesis 6:[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman]4[/FONT][FONT=Aldine,Kuenst,Clarendon,Times New Roman][SIZE=+1]. The fact that they were supernatural in their origin formed an easy step to their being regarded as the demi-gods of the Greeks.Thus the Babylonian "Creation Tablets", the Egyptian "Book of the dead", the Greek mythology, and heathen Comogonies, which by some are set on an equality with Scripture, or by others adduced in support of it, are all the corruption and perversion of primitive truths, distorded in proportion as their origin was forgotten, and their memories faded away.[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[nephilimiyr]

UFO speculations are kind of a different issue, though could be related. I'm not trying to convince anyone that UFO's are really angelic beings, or even real. Whether they are or not, I believe, by and large, that angels stay hidden from humans 99.999% of the time. If they do inhabit other planets and solar systems and galaxies (i.e. The Heavens), I believe they would be totally invisible to us, just as they are here on earth. Angels are only seen by men in the Bible when God ordains it for a specific time and purpose.

But we also know that, while not seen, they inhabit the earth and move around on it (Job 2:2, 2Kings 6:17). Abraham had two visitors that not only walked the ground, but even enjoyed food! (Gen. 18). Other angels occupied the sky such as the Star of Bethlehem (Matt. 2:9). And yet, generally, the angels are said to occupy the heavens (Eph. 6:12). So I guess I'm just trying to find out the need of a "different dimension" type of heaven. Being that angels get along just fine on the physical earth, why would they need a non-physical heaven?

Or to put it another way, if Angels can function in a corporeal earth, why the need for a noncorporeal heaven? If fact I'm not even sure angels can be properly described as noncorporeal. They seem to be corporeal at will.

Ok, so if the logical conclusion isn't to try to prove the UFO phenomenon what's your point in this study?

We all know, or should know that Satan is the Prince of the air, is there something more significant to that?

 

[Calminian]

Ok, so if the logical conclusion isn't to try to prove the UFO phenomenon what's your point in this study?

We all know, or should know that Satan is the Prince of the air, is there something more significant to that?

Neph, if you want to point out those implications, go right ahead. There are many implications that can be drawn from the idea of a corporeal heaven and hell and the apparent duel corporeal/noncorporeal nature of angels. They just weren't the ones I had in mind. Another poster's been pointing out the implications this may have on Gen. 6. Those arguing against the angels interpretation of Gen. 6 often point to the noncorporeal nature of angels. But my thread questions that premise.

 

[Calminian]

Here's another text which equates heaven with the sky and being physically located upward.

Acts 1:9 Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, 11 who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.”

Again, if "heaven" is some noncorporeal place in another dimension, why did the inspired writer, Luke, and the angels speak of it being upward? If Jesus was merely going to a different dimension of existence, why not just disappear standing right where he was? Why float up? Instead He floated up into the sky and no doubt kept going into space. And the angels said that's exactly where he would return from.

Yet another biblical argument for a material heaven.