Who's fooling who?

[hch]

7 hours ago, JoeMo said:

In Hebrew that is "b'nai ha Elohim" .  It is also "b'nai ha Elohim" in Job38:7:

"while the morning stars sang together
    and all the angels shouted for joy?"

The Hebrew used for angels here is "b'nai ha Elohim". You can philosophize and spiritualize all you want, but the Bible is clear that the Nephi;im or giants were the hybrid off spring of fallen angels and human women.

Is the problem with the Bible or the translators?

[hch]

11 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. Rev 17:7

Who or what is the beast in Revelation 13:1-10?

And who or what is the beast in Revelation 17:7?

Are they the same beast or different beasts?

Perhaps a word study would help make it clear re Rev 17:7-8?

7 ¶  And <2532> the angel <32> said <2036> (5627) unto me <3427>, Wherefore <1302> didst thou marvel <2296> (5656)? I <1473> will tell <2046> (5692) thee <4671> the mystery <3466> of the woman <1135>, and <2532> of the beast <2342> that carrieth <941> (5723) her <846>, which <3588> hath <2192> (5723) the seven <2033> heads <2776> and <2532> ten <1176> horns <2768>.
8  The beast <2342> that <3739> thou sawest <1492> (5627) was <2258> (5713), and <2532> is <2076> (5748) not <3756>; and <2532> shall <3195> (5719) ascend <305> (5721) out of <1537> the bottomless pit <12>, and <2532> go <5217> (5721) into <1519> perdition <684>: and <2532> they that dwell <2730> (5723) on <1909> the earth <1093> shall wonder <2296> (5695), whose <3739> names <3686> were <1125> <0> not <3756> written <1125> (5769) in <1909> the book <975> of life <2222> from <575> the foundation <2602> of the world <2889>, when they behold <991> (5723) the beast <2342> that was <3748> <2258> (5713), and <2532> is <2076> (5748) not <3756>, and yet <2539> is <2076> (5748).

Ge 1:2  And the earth <0776> was <01961> (8804) without form <08414>, and void <0922>; and darkness <02822> [was] upon the face <06440> of the deep <08415>. And the Spirit <07307> of God <0430> moved <07363> (8764) upon <05921> the face <06440> of the waters <04325>.
Jer 4:23  I beheld <07200> (8804) the earth <0776>, and, lo, [it was] without form <08414>, and void <0922>; and the heavens <08064>, and they [had] no light <0216>.

bottomless pit (12)=1) bottomless, unbounded [{Ge 1:2 Isa 44:27 Job 41:31 }] 
2) the abyss, the pit, the immeasurable depth 
3) of Orchus, very deep gulf or chasm in the lowest parts of the earth [{Ps 71:20 }] 
4) the common receptacle of the dead [{Ro 10:7 }] and especially as the abode of demons

form (80414) = 1) formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness 
1a) formlessness (of primeval earth) 
1a1) nothingness, empty space 
1b) that which is empty or unreal (of idols) (fig) 
1c) wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places) 
1d) place of chaos 
1e) vanity

Void (0922)=1) emptiness, void, waste

deep (08415)=1) deep, depths, deep places, abyss, the deep, sea 
1a) deep (of subterranean waters) 
1b) deep, sea, abysses (of sea) 
1c) primeval ocean, deep 
1d) deep, depth (of river)

You are welcome

[JoeMo]

3 hours ago, hch said:

Is the problem with the Bible or the translators?

Neither.  The problem is with the readers who refuse to believe what's written simply because they think it is too weird.  So we spiritualize away and dream up symbolism for stuff that's too weird.  Things will get weird again as soon as that bottomless pit or abyss is opened in the 5th Trumpet.

I used to think Revelation was just to weird to understand.  In today's world - watching events unfold - it's pretty clear in general what's coming (details are still unknown); and it matches up with a literal read of the book.

[stinsonmarri]

14 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I showed you earlier.

In Hebrew that is "b'nai ha Elohim" .  It is also "b'nai ha Elohim" in Job 38:7:

"while the morning stars sang together
    and all the angels shouted for joy?"

The Hebrew used for angels here is "b'nai ha Elohim". You can philosophize and spiritualize all you want, but the Bible is clear that the Nephi;im or giants were the hybrid off spring of fallen angels and human women.

No; the word nephilim means fallen ones in Hebrew; as in fallen angels and their offspring.

Joe: I will try this one more time, Job 38:7 said the Morning stars all sing together, that was the angels. If you look throughout the New Testament stars always was a symbol of angels. The star that led the wise men, the stars, Rev 9:1 a star had a key, that was an angel. But the sons of YAHWEH were unfallen worlds.

The descendants of Seth were called the sons of God—the descendants of Cain, the sons of men. As the sons of God mingled with the sons of men, they became corrupt, and by intermarriage with them, lost, through the influence of their wives, their peculiar, holy character, and united with the sons of Cain in their idolatry. SP p. 66

Now you know I do not us EGW a lot however, I do know when she stands for truth. I have told you and gave you Hebrew 1:5 and you refuse to accept the exact word angels at anytime have never been called HIS son. They were not made in HIS IMAGE we and the other beings on other worlds are! You rather accept the fable of man in Job 38:7 that they are suppose to YAHWEH'S son instead of the unfallen worlds and the angels that sung were call stars! He said HE WILL KILL FLESH nowhere in Gen 6 do you see anything that states angel, messenger at all. I hope you will not take this personal and reason with me. If the Bible does not say anywhere that these were angels you would take man's tradition over the Bible? Me and you have talked about the trinity, it is not in the Bible and neither anywhere does it make claim that angels are YAHWEH'S sons. The Bible even tells you that, so why want you believe the Bible when it clearly states at ANYTIME have HE ever call an angels HIS SON. The Persians stated that their deity had two sons which included Satan (this word comes from Persia), that later is how part of the Mormon belief also known as the Latter Day Saints! Some Protestants also believe this fable but I agree with the Bible they do not look like THE ALMIGHTY ONES we do that is why we are call actually HIS children throughout the Bible.

Now you insulted me and make me feel very sad. I never use philosophy when dealing with the Bible. I use the actual meaning of words:

From H5307; properly, a feller, that is, a bully or tyrant: - giant. Strong

If you look at Numbers 13:33 the exact word is used. So Moses was indicating that all the people during that time were extremely tall. Where is the philosophy in that. That is what I previously stated. But the word also mean many people who were also tyrant or fallen ones from the original word "nephal."

The word is loosely translated as giants in some Bibles and left untranslated in others. The "sons of God" have been interpreted as fallen angels in some traditional Jewish explanations.

The Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon (1908) gives the meaning of nephilim as "giants", and holds that proposed etymologies of the word are "all very precarious." Many suggested interpretations are based on the assumption that the word is a derivative of Hebrew verbal root n-ph-l (נ־פ־ל) "fall". Robert Baker Girdlestone[ argued in 1871 the word comes from the Hiphil causative stem, implying that the nephilim are to be perceived as "those that cause others to fall down." Ronald Hendel states that it is a passive form: "ones who have fallen", grammatically analogous to paqid "one who is appointed" (i.e., overseer), asir "one who is bound" (i.e., prisoner), etc.

The majority of ancient biblical versions—including the Septuagint, Theodotion, Latin Vulgate, Samaritan Targum, Targum Onkelos, and Targum Neofiti—interpret the word to mean "giants".Symmachus translates it as "the violent ones"and Aquila's translation has been interpreted to mean either "the fallen ones" or "the ones falling [upon their enemies]." Wikipedia

Given the ambiguity of the Genesis passage, there are several interpretations about the relationship between the “sons of God” and the Nephilim. Some have understood the sons of God to be fallen angels, and the Nephilim are the offspring they produced with human women. This view was described in the First Book of Enoch, a noncanonical Jewish text, and remains a popular explanation. The First Book of Enoch also notes that the Nephilim were giants, which seems in accordance with the “people of great size” described in the Numbers passage. The apparent gigantism of the Nephilim is argued to stem from their supernatural origin, though some have countered that it is theologically problematic to suggest that angels or demons, as purely spiritual beings, could physically reproduce with humans. 

A less supernatural view holds that the Nephilim were simply men who fell away from righteousness. Specifically, some theologians have held that “sons of God” is a reference to the descendants of Seth, the righteous son of Adam, and that the Nephilim were members of his bloodline who rejected God. This view, known as the Sethian view, was held by St. Augustine and other Church Fathers as well as by many Jewish theologians. The Sethian view is sometimes elaborated with the assertion that the “daughters of men” were the ungodly women of the bloodline of Cain, Adam’s murderous son. With the Nephilim as mere humans, their “great size” is variously taken literally or metaphorically, though they were undoubtedly considered great warriors. Britannica.com

I will state it again, I stand on what the Bible says, in Heb 1:5, that is truth to me. I leave up to you what you choose to believe. I will always pray that we can reason together in love.

Blessings!

 

 

 

[JoeMo]

7 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

The descendants of Seth were called the sons of God—the descendants of Cain, the sons of men.

Show me where it says that in the Bible. Also, Genesis 6 is concerned with the daughters of men - the "benoth ha adam".

 

7 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

Job 38:7 said the Morning stars all sing together, that was the angels.

Look at the whole verse:

"while the morning stars sang together  and all the angels shouted for joy?"

If the morning stars were the angels,  who were the "angels" (sons of God or b'nai ha Elohim in other translations?

8 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

I have told you and gave you Hebrew 1:5 and you refuse to accept the exact word angels at anytime have never been called HIS son.

Not in the New Testament; but in the OT the term sons of God was used exclusively to describe Adam and the angels - beings directly created by God.

 

8 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

If the Bible does not say anywhere that these were angels you would take man's tradition over the Bible?

Sorry; the Sethite interpretation is man's tradition.  Both Jews and Christians  believed as I have stated until Augustine (as you correctly stated) - an early Catholic Biship - introduced the Sethite view.

The last part of your post (the stuff in bold) is an excellent synopsis of the controversy we are discussing.  You prefer the Sethite view, I prefer the fallen angel view.

8 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

Now you insulted me and make me feel very sad. I never use philosophy when dealing with the Bible.

I apologize, Marrian. I never meant to insult you. It was not a nice thing for me to say.  Please forgive me.

8 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

I leave up to you what you choose to believe. I will always pray that we can reason together in love.

I do the same for you, my sister.

Sabbath Blessings to you.

[stinsonmarri]

37 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

apologize, Marrian. I never meant to insult you. It was not a nice thing for me to say.  Please forgive me.

I already have and you know that my brother. Let me say this words have been change in the Bible and what's in the New compliments the Old. They are both The Bible and not one word will be may void. If we all read in the Old that YAHSHUA would come, then we must accept the New the same way. We cannot base anything on us but from the Word that is in both the Old and the New. Remember people changed things you and I have discuss this. Especially they want you to believe it. Angels have no sex organs, and Paul quoted YAHWEH who said at anytime have HE ever called an angel HIS son!

Love You and Happy Sabbath, kiss your wife for me!

[stinsonmarri]

18 hours ago, hch said:

Who or what is the beast in Revelation 13:1-10?

And who or what is the beast in Revelation 17:7?

Are they the same beast or different beasts?

Perhaps a word study would help make it clear re Rev 17:7-8?

7 ¶  And <2532> the angel <32> said <2036> (5627) unto me <3427>, Wherefore <1302> didst thou marvel <2296> (5656)? I <1473> will tell <2046> (5692) thee <4671> the mystery <3466> of the woman <1135>, and <2532> of the beast <2342> that carrieth <941> (5723) her <846>, which <3588> hath <2192> (5723) the seven <2033> heads <2776> and <2532> ten <1176> horns <2768>.
8  The beast <2342> that <3739> thou sawest <1492> (5627) was <2258> (5713), and <2532> is <2076> (5748) not <3756>; and <2532> shall <3195> (5719) ascend <305> (5721) out of <1537> the bottomless pit <12>, and <2532> go <5217> (5721) into <1519> perdition <684>: and <2532> they that dwell <2730> (5723) on <1909> the earth <1093> shall wonder <2296> (5695), whose <3739> names <3686> were <1125> <0> not <3756> written <1125> (5769) in <1909> the book <975> of life <2222> from <575> the foundation <2602> of the world <2889>, when they behold <991> (5723) the beast <2342> that was <3748> <2258> (5713), and <2532> is <2076> (5748) not <3756>, and yet <2539> is <2076> (5748).

Ge 1:2  And the earth <0776> was <01961> (8804) without form <08414>, and void <0922>; and darkness <02822> [was] upon the face <06440> of the deep <08415>. And the Spirit <07307> of God <0430> moved <07363> (8764) upon <05921> the face <06440> of the waters <04325>.
Jer 4:23  I beheld <07200> (8804) the earth <0776>, and, lo, [it was] without form <08414>, and void <0922>; and the heavens <08064>, and they [had] no light <0216>.

bottomless pit (12)=1) bottomless, unbounded [{Ge 1:2 Isa 44:27 Job 41:31 }] 
2) the abyss, the pit, the immeasurable depth 
3) of Orchus, very deep gulf or chasm in the lowest parts of the earth [{Ps 71:20 }] 
4) the common receptacle of the dead [{Ro 10:7 }] and especially as the abode of demons

form (80414) = 1) formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness 
1a) formlessness (of primeval earth) 
1a1) nothingness, empty space 
1b) that which is empty or unreal (of idols) (fig) 
1c) wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places) 
1d) place of chaos 
1e) vanity

Void (0922)=1) emptiness, void, waste

deep (08415)=1) deep, depths, deep places, abyss, the deep, sea 
1a) deep (of subterranean waters) 
1b) deep, sea, abysses (of sea) 
1c) primeval ocean, deep 
1d) deep, depth (of river)

You are welcome

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Gen 1:2 

Strong Hebrew Dictionary

Form “tôhû;” From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.

Void: “bôhû;” From an unused root (meaning to be empty); a vacuity, that is, (superficially) an undistinguishable ruin: - emptiness, void.

Darkness: “chôshek;” From H2821; the dark; hence (literally) darkness; figuratively misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness: - dark (-ness), night, obscurity. (I suggest you read the root word)

Deep: “tehôm, tehôm;” (Usually feminine) from H1949; an abyss (as a surging mass of water), especially the deep (the main sea or the subterranean water supply): - deep (place), depth.

That saith to the deep, Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers: Isa 44:27 

Deep: “tsûlâh;” From an unused root meaning to sink; an abyss (of the sea): - deep.

Abyss: late 14c. in Latin form abyssus, "depths of the earth or sea; primordial chaos;" early 14c. as abime "depths of the earth or sea; bottomless pit, Hell" (from Old French; see abysm). Both are from Late Latin abyssus "bottomless pit," from Greek abyssos (limne) "bottomless (pool)," from abyssos "bottomless, unfathomed," hence, generally, "enormous, unfathomable," also as a noun, he abyssos "the great depth, the underworld, the bottomless pit." This is a compound of a- "without" (see a- (3)) + byssos "bottom," a word of uncertain origin possibly related to bathos "depth" [Liddell & Scott]. Watkins suggests a connection with the root of bottom (n.); Beekes suggests it is pre-Greek.

The current form in English is a 16c. partial re-Latinization. Greek abyssos was used in Septuagint to translate Hebrew tehom "original chaos" and was used in the New Testament for "Hell." OED notes, "the word has had five variants, abime, abysm, abysmus, abyssus, abyss; of which abyss remains as the ordinary form, and abysm as archaic or poetic." In reference to a seemingly bottomless gulf from 1630s. Etymology Dictionary

For if ELOHIYM did not spare the angels (messengers) who sinned, but sent them to Tartaros, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be kept for judgment, 2 Pe 2:4  Scripture 98+

And the angels (messengers) who did not keep their own principality, but left their own dwelling, He has kept in everlasting shackles under darkness for the judgment of the Great Day. Jude 1:6  Scripture 98+

TARTAROS (Tartarus) was the primordial god (protogenos) of the stormy pit of Tartaros that lies beneath the foundations of the earth. He was the body of the pit itself rather than an anthropomorphic deity. Tartaros was envisaged as the opposite of the sky, an inverted dome lying beneath the flat earth. Greek Primordial God (This is where the lie come from about the bottomless pit beneath the flat earth)

In Greek mythology, Tartarus (/ˈtɑːrtərəs/; Ancient Greek: Τάρταρος, Tartaros)[1] is the deep abyss that is used as a dungeon of torment and suffering for the wicked and as the prison for the Titans. Tartarus is the place where, according to Plato's Gorgias (c. 400 BC), souls are judged after death and where the wicked received divine punishment. Wikipedia

I going to make Rev 17:7 Very simple for you:

of the beast that carried her…

Beast: “thērion;” Diminutive from the same as G2339; a dangerous animal: - (venomous, wild) beast.

Carried: “bastazō,” to lift, literally or figuratively (endure, declare, sustain, receive, etc.): - bear, carry, take up.

Her: “autos” of the third person, and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons: - her, it (-self), one, the other, (mine) own, said, ([self-], the) same, ([him-, my-, thy-]) self, [your-] selves, she, that, their (-s), them ([-selves]), there [-at, -by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with], they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which. Compare G848.

Common sense would tell you that the Greek word of the third person would be her because it is a woman who is call a whore, don’t you think?

All of what you presented was not an order just like it was, I am sorry thrown together. But again I take the Bible over Greek mythology.

Now, the earth was made perfect and you would think that THE ALMIGHTY ONES would cast 1/3 of all the evil angels to the earth. The Greek word "ge," mean terrene or land mass. Heaven has a land mass, the moon has a land mass. I even gave to you who you always quote the Book Spirit of Prophecy what she wrote. They were kick out before the earth was made. See you was so hype on EGW before but what happen? I agree with her simply because why would MICHAEL cast them out into a perfect world. You only hear of Satan at one place the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. You see you have to hang on to things that make no sense! Then you sold EGW out as well. We fail, then only one wicked angel for each individual on this earth until they died. Then they must return to prison. Only once were there recorded in the Bible was a legion of them allowed at one time and the ALL had to go back to prison. That's a fact because that is what the Bible said!

It is sad that we mixed truth with fables or myth and then you love to rise above by saying you welcome! I said to you:

Happy Sabbath and blessings!

[Gregory Matthews]

So, how is the term "sons of God" used in the Bible:

In the Old Testament:  Genesis 6:1-4 is the basic passage that has caused some people to suggest that humans has had sexual intercourse with angels.

*  The idea of human and angelic sexual intercourse is found in a number pagan religions.  But, the   question that we  face is whether or not this idea is Biblical.

*  The context of Genesis, chapter 5, is totally that of  human beings and genealogy of Adam.  Nothing in this chapter would suggest an angelic aspect to those who descended from  Adam.

 *   In verses 4 & 5, of Genesis 6, there is a clear application to humanity.  There is not clear statement that these people are half humans and half angels.  The are simply described as human.

*  This chapter lays the background for what is called the flood of Noah.    That background is focused on what is identified as the wickedness of humanity.  It says nothing about the wickedness of a humanity that has mixed with angels.

*  Job 1:6 & 2:1 & 38:7 do clearly apply to angelic beings.  However, it must be noted that this application is not to a half-breed being that is part human and part an angel.  These are simply angels.

In the New Testament:  This term is used to apply to people we would say are followers of Christ, or Christians.

*  John 1:12 & 13, although in this passage some translations use the term "children of "God."

 *  I John 3: 9, which speaks of humans being "born again."

*  I John 4:7 tells us that humans may be "born again."

*  I John 5: 1-4 tells us that humans who follow Christ are "born of God."

*  I John 3: 2-3, uses the term "children of God."

*  Matthew 5:45 speaks of humans having a Father in heaven."

In brief:  Based upon the above, I have to reject that idea that the passage in Genesis tells us that humans and angels engaged in sexual intercourse.  Rather, I accept the idea that the term "sons of God,"  as used in the Bible, may refer to angels and may refer to humans, but never to a half-breed between humans and angels. 

 

[JoeMo]

8 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

For if ELOHIYM did not spare the angels (messengers) who sinned, but sent them to Tartaros, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be kept for judgment, 2 Pe 2:4  Scripture 98+

And the angels (messengers) who did not keep their own principality, but left their own dwelling, He has kept in everlasting shackles under darkness for the judgment of the Great Day. Jude 1:6  Scripture 98+

These verses relate to and support the argument I make for fallen angels taking on flesh and coming to earth and having children with human women.  The angels in Tartarus are the ones who left their own dwelling (heaven) and came to earth and manipulated the human genome.  Their sin was either having physical sex or editing the genes through something like CRSPR to create human/supernatural hybrids.

True, some angels are messengers.  There is a hierarchy of angels in heaven.  Another class of angels are called "watchers".  They are mentioned several times in Daniel 4.  I believe these watchers were the 70 angels assigned by God to watch over the nations as explained in Deut. 32.7-9"

7 Remember the days of old;
    consider the years of many generations;
ask your father, and he will show you,
    your elders, and they will tell you.
8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
    when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
    according to the number of the sons of God. [b'nai ha Elohim}

9 But the Lord's portion is his people,
    Jacob his allotted heritage."

I believe these "sons of God" were the watchers - high-ranking angels set to watch over the nations while God Himself would watch over Israel/Jacob.  While watching, these angels became enamored with (lusted after) human women, took on flesh, and had children with them - creatures that God never intended.  For this, they were sent to Tartarus.

[stinsonmarri]

11 hours ago, JoeMo said:

These verses relate to and support the argument I make for fallen angels taking on flesh and coming to earth and having children with human women.  The angels in Tartarus are the ones who left their own dwelling (heaven) and came to earth and manipulated the human genome.  Their sin was either having physical sex or editing the genes through something like CRSPR to create human/supernatural hybrids.

True, some angels are messengers.  There is a hierarchy of angels in heaven.  Another class of angels are called "watchers".  They are mentioned several times in Daniel 4.  I believe these watchers were the 70 angels assigned by God to watch over the nations as explained in Deut. 32.7-9"

7 Remember the days of old;
    consider the years of many generations;
ask your father, and he will show you,
    your elders, and they will tell you.
8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
    when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
    according to the number of the sons of God. [b'nai ha Elohim}

9 But the Lord's portion is his people,
    Jacob his allotted heritage."

I believe these "sons of God" were the watchers - high-ranking angels set to watch over the nations while God Himself would watch over Israel/Jacob.  While watching, these angels became enamored with (lusted after) human women, took on flesh, and had children with them - creatures that God never intended.  For this, they were sent to Tartarus.

 

I love you Joe like a sister; it is not what we believe it is what the Bible says. Many have twisted things in the Bible. You either take the whole Word of THE MOST or not! Heb 1:5 is very clear. Gen Chapter 6 only mention flesh beings and did say anything about the sons being angels you are saying it, the Bible does not! Beni na mean sons, daughters, and children when you understand the grammatical structure of the ancient Afrikan language. They call it Hebrew but it is actually Phonecians and Biblical scholars do not want to give you the truth. However, they put it under the Afro-asiatic languages. 

In the cognate northern Syro-African usually but erroneously called “ Semitic,” the of the word “warkh,”  is replaced by “yod.”

Masudi, one of the earliest and most celebrated of them, who flourished in the tenth century of our era, was thoroughly acquainted not only with the works of Ptolemy, but also with those (now lost) of Marinus of Tyre ; and nothing is more natural than that he should have adopted from them the “ Mountains of the Moon,” in common with much more which he is to be regarded merely as provincialisms, and not as constituting distinct dialects. The language spoken by the Israelites must therefore have been acquired by them during their residence in the Land of Canaan; and it should consequently be denominated Canaanitish, as a member of the Hamitish, Hamitic, or Syro African class of languages, and not “Semitic;” which name, though it may designate the lineage of the descendants of Abraham, is wrongly given to the language spoken by the Hebrews after they had quitted their native country. I learn from my friend Mr. Edwin Norris that, “in a fragment of an old Assyrian syllabary found at Nineveh, the monogram -… , which means month, is read phonetically “arrhu:: possibly it means moon.” Assuming the language in question to be the earliest spoken at Nineveh, it may be called “ Nimrodic," after the Hamite founder of that city. THE SOURCES OF THE NILE; HISTORY OF NILOTIC DISCOVERY. By CHARLES T. BEKE, PH.D.

The language that is used today has been Latinized and the story comes from Greek mythology and adapted by the Christians people. The Book of Enoch is a fable and was not written by Enoch and the dating of the book will prove that.

The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch; Ge'ez: መጽሐፈ ሄኖክ maṣḥafa hēnok) is an ancient Jewish apocalyptic religious text, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah. Enoch contains unique material on the origins of demons and giants, why some angels fell from heaven, an explanation of why the Great Flood was morally necessary, and prophetic exposition of the thousand-year reign of the Messiah.

The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) of the text are estimated to date from about 300–200 BCE, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the 100 BCE.

Various Aramaic fragments found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as koine Greek and Latin fragments were proof that The Book of Enoch was known by early Jews and Christians. This book was also quoted by some 1st and 2nd century authors as in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Authors of the New Testament were also familiar with some content of the story. A short section of 1 Enoch (1:9) is cited in the New Testament, Epistle of Jude, Jude 1:14–15, and is attributed there to "Enoch the Seventh from Adam" (1 Enoch 60:8), although this section of 1 Enoch is a midrash on Deuteronomy 33:2. Several copies of the earlier sections of 1 Enoch were preserved among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Wikipedia

Again, in Hebrew the Book Paul wrote to them because they too had spread all over the world during this time. They had adopted these fables and spread them along with the Greek Christians. They should have been on meat, but Paul said they were still drinking milk. I say this with love, the Bible says clearly to us like it say to them, that YAHWEH Said HIS people are lost because the lack of knowledge. If YAHSHUA spoke to Paul on the road of Damascus, then he heard YAHWEH Speak in Heb 1-5!

Blessings and kiss your wife for me!

[hch]

I saw the necessity of the messengers, especially, watching and checking all fanaticism wherever they might see it rise. Satan is pressing in on every side, and unless we watch for him, and have our eyes open to his devices and snares, and have on the whole armor of God, the fiery darts of the wicked will hit us. There are many precious truths contained in the Word of God, but it is “present truth” that the flock needs now. I have seen the danger of the messengers running off from the important points of present truth, to dwell upon subjects that are not calculated to unite the flock and sanctify the soul. Satan will here take every possible advantage to injure the cause.

But such subjects as the sanctuary, in connection with the 2300 days, the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, are perfectly calculated to explain the past Advent movement and show what our present position is, establish the faith of the doubting, and give certainty to the glorious future. These, I have frequently seen, were the principal subjects on which the messengers should dwell.[1]

---

[1]EW 63.1-2

[JoeMo]

Hi Marrian,

While I appreciate and respect your scholarship, as I've said before, the Nephilim issue is controversial and contentious.  If two theologians get together on it, they will probably argue 3 or 4 different opinions.

I am currently reading a book called "The Genesis 6 Conspiracy" by Tom Horn, PhD.  He discusses several of the points you bring up concerning the origin of words and languages; and admits that there is some uncertainties about certain terms.  He also takes into account ancient non-biblical stories of the flood, fallen angels, and giants from all over the globe.  While they do indeed contain details that don't agree with scripture, the main story is the same - the "gods" came down from the sky, and mated with human women; producing giants and monsters that subjugated and persecuted humanity until rival "gods" sent a flood and killed all life on land accept for very few pure people.  The similarities between the stories compels one to believe these myths have some source in reality. He puts forth a great argument for the fallen angel theory, as do several other theologians.  I'm not a theologian - just a curious student.  I had developed my current opinion about Genesis 6 prior to reading this book, so I am not simply "persuaded" by the book - I was of my current opinion before I started reading it.

That being said, I am persuaded by the literal read of scripture concerning the fallen angel theory; and that is what I choose to believe.  You, obviously are persuaded by the Sethite theory, which is fine.  We are both free to believe what we choose. We can agree to disagree.

Love and Blessings to you, sister!

[stinsonmarri]

On 9/22/2019 at 10:23 AM, JoeMo said:

Hi Marrian,

While I appreciate and respect your scholarship, as I've said before, the Nephilim issue is controversial and contentious.  If two theologians get together on it, they will probably argue 3 or 4 different opinions.

I am currently reading a book called "The Genesis 6 Conspiracy" by Tom Horn, PhD.  He discusses several of the points you bring up concerning the origin of words and languages; and admits that there is some uncertainties about certain terms.  He also takes into account ancient non-biblical stories of the flood, fallen angels, and giants from all over the globe.  While they do indeed contain details that don't agree with scripture, the main story is the same - the "gods" came down from the sky, and mated with human women; producing giants and monsters that subjugated and persecuted humanity until rival "gods" sent a flood and killed all life on land accept for very few pure people.  The similarities between the stories compels one to believe these myths have some source in reality. He puts forth a great argument for the fallen angel theory, as do several other theologians.  I'm not a theologian - just a curious student.  I had developed my current opinion about Genesis 6 prior to reading this book, so I am not simply "persuaded" by the book - I was of my current opinion before I started reading it.

That being said, I am persuaded by the literal read of scripture concerning the fallen angel theory; and that is what I choose to believe.  You, obviously are persuaded by the Sethite theory, which is fine.  We are both free to believe what we choose. We can agree to disagree.

Love and Blessings to you, sister!

Joe: A theory is it has not been proven. I not only proved to you what YAHWEH said. My friend you have not proven that YAHWEH say anything about angels mating with flesh! Why would YAHWEH allow these angels do that where is proof that these mixed beings exist? So how can you prove that Noah was not mix even though YAHWEH found grace with him? Did he not fall after the flood and became drunk, also what about Nimrod and those who followed him. If Noah was mix, that meant all of his sons were mix. You stick to that one Hebrew word so why does it say in the Bible we are his children and never the holy angels his children?

Yet it pleased YAHWEH to bruise HIM. He has caused HIM to suffer. When you make HIS SOUL an offering for sin, HE will see HIS offspring. HE will prolong HIS days, and YAHWEH’S pleasure will prosper in HIS HAND. Isa 53:10 

Yet the number of the sons of Israel Will be like the sand of the sea, Which cannot be measured or numbered; And in the place Where it is said to them, "You are not MY people," It will be said to them, "You are the sons of THE LIVING ELOHIYM. Hosea 1:10

But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of THE MOST HIGH; for HE HIMSELF is kind to ungrateful and evil men. Luke 6:35

But as many as received HIM, to them HE gave the right to become children of ELOHIYM, even to those who believe in HIS NAME, John 1:12

And I will be a FATHER to you, And you shall be sons and daughters to Me," Says THE MOST HIGH ALMIGHTY. 2 Cor 6:18

For all who are being led by THE SPIRIT of ELOHIYM, these are sons of ELOHIYM. For all who are being led by ELOHIYM, these are sons of ELOHIYM. THE SPIRIT HIMSELF bears witness with our mind that we are children of ELOHIYM. Rom 8:14, 16

That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of ELOHIYM, but the children of THE PROMISE are regarded as descendants. Rom 9:8

For you are all sons of ELOHIYM through faith in THE MESSIAH YAHSHUA. Gal 3:26

Beloved, now we are children of ELOHIYM, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be We know that when HE appears, we will be like HIM, because we will see HIM just as HE is. 1 John 3:2

Now, many try to use Ps. 82:6, but Joe words have be added not in the proper sentence structure in English. The scribes in the days of the KJV believed in the myth and changed it to appear that who are god's - angels? Come on you know that is not true, they have never been equal to THE ALMIGHTY ONES! Following what the Ps was talking about how unjustly the poor and needy were being care for. Asaph answered ELOHIYM, (all of the other words between the two Hebrew were added like angels were ELOHIM!) Then Asaph , declared the poor and the needy also are children of THE MOST HIGH!

The Bible does indicate all sinners and the wicked are children of Satan:

By this the children of ELOHIYM and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of ELOHIYM, nor the one who does not love his brother. 1 John 3:10

Do you not see that theories do not work with YAHWEH it is first faith and facts only according to the Bible. All I ask of you is to show me anywhere that YAHWEH actually call the angels the mighty ones HIS SON, HIS child, HIS, children, HIS daughters? Please do not get upset just show me! I gave you from other sources the historical thought about the book of Enoch. But, you will agree I provided Scriptures to show, not theorized that we not angels, but are HIS children when and only when we become again like the Adams that is perfection. Then we become HIS children. HE through THE HOLY SPIRIT  to lead and guide us back to become righteous. When converted and  and turn to walk and be obedient we have come under the Covenant from the beginning to become HIS children. So show only in the Bible what I say above and Joe, if it is in there, then I will believe! I know you believe that we should be on one accord and it must be proven by HIS Word Joe, not by theory!

Your friend, be blessed!

[JoeMo]

10 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

My friend you have not proven that YAHWEH say anything about angels mating with flesh!  Why would YAHWEH allow these angels do that where is proof that these mixed beings exist?

The Bible proves it.  Reas Genesis 6:1-4 in any commonly accepted translation of the Bible.

The children of the supernatural beings who had married these women became famous heroes and warriors. They were called Nephilim and lived on the earth at that time and even later. (Gen 6:4 - CEV)

The ·Nephilim [L fallen ones; C the significance of the name is unclear] were on the earth in those days and also later. That was when the sons of God ·had sexual relations with [L came in to] the daughters of ·human beings [T man; C Hebrew: Adam; 1:27–28]. These women gave birth to children ·who became famous [L men of a name] and were the mighty warriors of long ago. [C The Nephilim of Num. 13:31–33, though not related genealogically, were giants, suggesting these pre-flood Nephilim were also.] (EXB)

In those days, and even later, there were giants on the earth who were descendants of human women and the heavenly beings. They were the great heroes and famous men of long ago.(GNT)

The Nephilim were on the earth at that time (and also immediately afterward), when those divine beings were having sexual relations with those human women, who gave birth to children for them. These children became the heroes and legendary figures of ancient times.(ISV)

In those days, and even afterwards, when the evil beings from the spirit world were sexually involved with human women, their children became giants, of whom so many legends are told.(TLB)

You can either believe what Genesis 6:1-4 has to say or you can reject it.  You have not "proven" the Sethite view, either.  How could the mating of 2 normal humans produce a race of giants?

I can't "prove" my point and neither can you.  Neither of us were there to witness it. I have to go on the word of scripture.

You ask why God would allow the angels to do this?  Why did God allow satan to deceive Eve?  Why did God allow the Hebrews to be enslaved by Egypt?  Why does God allow the wholesale slaughter of Christians?  Why did God allow slavery? Why did God allow the wholesale slaughter of His Chosen people in the holocaust?  God gave His sentient beings - angels and humans - a free will.  He only interferes with the consequences of choices when it threatens the existence of His special creation - humanity - or His chosen people - the Israelites.  That's why He sent the flood - to save humanity from being destroyed by these evil hybrid offspring of angels and humans.

One reason that angels do not marry in heaven could be that all angels are males.  I have never seen a female angel mentioned in scripture.

[hch]

There are studies that will help us to get ready for Jesus to come

and there are side conversations that will not.

Though no man knoweth the day nor the hour of His coming, we are instructed and required to know when it is near. We are further taught that to disregard His warning, and refuse or neglect to know when His Advent is near, will be as fatal for us, as it was for those who lived in the days of Noah not to know when the flood was coming (GC88 370.2).

 

[8thdaypriest]

8 hours ago, JoeMo said:

One reason that angels do not marry in heaven could be that all angels are males.  I have never seen a female angel mentioned in scripture.

 I believe the angels are asexual - neither male nor female, and non-reproducing.  If - BIG if, such inbreeding with human woman were possible (which at present I still doubt), the asexual fallen angels would have to incarnate into human flesh - as adults (not babies), in order to be of the same "kind".  In this creation "kind" can reproduce only "after their kind".  

  It could be that Satan simply wanted to pollute the human bloodline, to force Jesus into dying for fallen angels too.  It could be the fallen angels saw how pleasurable sex was, and wanted to engage.  It could be that Satan wanted to pollute the human race to bring it to a point where the LORD would have to destroy it - all of it.  The LORD did almost destroy the human race - in the Flood.

[JoeMo]

3 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

It could be that Satan simply wanted to pollute the human bloodline, to force Jesus into dying for fallen angels too.  It could be the fallen angels saw how pleasurable sex was, and wanted to engage.  It could be that Satan wanted to pollute the human race to bring it to a point where the LORD would have to destroy it - all of it.  The LORD did almost destroy the human race - in the Flood.

Exactly! The bolded part of what I quoted IMHO are the reasons the fallen angels (at the behest of satan) carried out this sacrilege.  These superhuman hybrids were meant to pollute the human genome into creatures never intended by God.  It is also feasible that these superhuman hybrids were meant to kill off humanity (before the flood and Israel (after the flood) to eliminate Christ's bloodline..

[B/W Photodude]

23 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

These superhuman hybrids were meant to pollute the human genome into creatures never intended by God.  It is also feasible that these superhuman hybrids were meant to kill off humanity (before the flood and Israel (after the flood) to eliminate Christ's bloodline..

I do get amazed at what I read here sometimes. Super humans hybrids, angels copulating with humans? Never read that in my Bible, never read it in SOP, never heard it in church!

It does say in SOP that Adam was in the approximate size of 15 ft tall. Didn't take an evil angel to get him that tall. Some may not believe it, but the Bible says they also lived to nearly 1000 years back in those days. Which is harder - live to 1000 years or be 15 ft tall.

[phkrause]

On 9/24/2019 at 11:55 AM, JoeMo said:

One reason that angels do not marry in heaven could be that all angels are males.  I have never seen a female angel mentioned in scripture.

From all my studies I've always heard that Angels were not created in the image of God, only humans are!! And again Jesus tells us that we will be like them once we get to the next heaven and earth, no more marriage, etc., so that tells me that angels don't have that capibility!!

[JoeMo]

23 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

I do get amazed at what I read here sometimes. Super humans hybrids, angels copulating with humans? Never read that in my Bible,

Then I guess you never read Genesis 6:1-4.  Those verses weren't put there as a casual parenthetical rabbit trail; they were put there to introduce the reason for the flood. In fact, the superhuman hybrids being the offspring of angel/human union was the common belief among Christians, Jews, and the pagan nations of the Middle East until Augustine - a Catholic Bishop - introduced the Sethite concept in the 4th century.

Who says they had to copulate? Humans are able to "custom design" babies through gene editing and cutting with a program called CRSPR. Only ethics prevents science from performing a "proof of concept".  I wouldn't be surprised if some clandestine lab hasn't already created a designer baby.  If humans can manipulate the human genome, why couldn't angels - who are probably much smarter than we are - do it?

23 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Which is harder - live to 1000 years or be 15 ft tall.

That Adam was 15 feet tall is harder to believe.  That men lived to be almost 1,000 years old is in clearly in the Bible.  Only EGW (nowhere in the Bible) claims that Adam was 15 feet tall.

[8thdaypriest]

Mrs White does talk about "the confused species that the LORD did not create" being destroyed in the Flood, but happening again after.  She doesn't mention demon/human hybrids. She says they resulted from "the amalgamation of man and animal" - something we know is not genetically possible.  She even said that "amalgamation" was still "seen in certain races of men" back in her day.  Do you think she "saw" some of these creatures in a vision, and was just confused about how they came to be? 

[JoeMo]

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Mrs White does talk about "the confused species that the LORD did not create" being destroyed in the Flood, but happening again after.  She doesn't mention demon/human hybrids. She says they resulted from "the amalgamation of man and animal" - something we know is not genetically possible.  She even said that "amalgamation" was still "seen in certain races of men" back in her day.  Do you think she "saw" some of these creatures in a vision, and was just confused about how they came to be? 

Very possibly.  The very idea of fallen angels breeding with human women is bizzare, perverse, and weird to say the least - but there it is right in Genesis 6:1-4.  I don't know how literally people took Genesis 6 back then, but if EGW saw these hybrid creatures in vision, she could very accurately say they were amalgamated or confused.

The sculptures on ancient temples of minotaurs, centaurs,  pans, people with wings, dogs with human heads, etc. may tell an historical story behind the mythology and symbolism.  Just because these myths do indeed contain errors, they might not be 100% wrong.  There may be a sliver of fact in them.  Same with 1 Enoch.

[JoeMo]

A very wise Golden Poster on this forum said in another thread:

"It's almost impossible to change someone's mind using facts. This happens due
to "motivated reasoning", a psychology term that refers to the way people usually
believe whatever they want to believe and use the flimsiest piece of evidence to
justify that belief, even when there is plenty of verified evidence to disprove it.

I think that's what might be going on here.  Almost everyone rejects what I have been proposing, but no one has presented any sound Biblical evidence to counter it - only human logic and tradition. Why? because what I am proposing is too weird. Yet, the  Bible is blatantly clear in Genesis 6:1-4 what happened before the flood; and evidently after the flood, according to the spies sent by Moses into Canaan:

"We 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.” (Numbers 13:33)  God went ahead of the Israelites to drive these freaks out of the land; and ordered the Israelites to utterly destroy all people, animals, towns, livestock, etc. associated with these tribes.  These people included the Anakites/Amorites, Hittites, Girgashites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites (See Exodus 13:5,23:23, 33:2, 34:11, Numbers 13:29, Deuteronomy 7:1, 20:17, Joshua 3:10)

We are in a war with evil spiritual forces bent on the destruction of humanity - particularly God's Chosen People and His elect, whether we choose to be or not.

" For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." (Eph. 6:12)

This is not a spiritual war relegated to the distant past or far future. It's been happening continuously for the past 6,000 years.  As we are failing to see the consequences of the creation of human hybrids in the past (i.e., the Flood), will humans join forces with the fallen angels by creating our own race of "superhuman Nephilim" though genetic editing and clipping (CRSPR) - creatures that God never intended to exist?  Will these fallen angels appear once more as little green men from outer space to help us through our next state of "evilution" (misspelling intended)?  How does science know the unintended consequences of fooling around with God's basic building blocks of His perfect creation? Not saying this will happen, but I ain't saying it won't, either. 

Our technology has taken us to the edge of being "gods"; but morally we are still the same self centered, arrogant, unbelieving, stiff-necked, rebellious people we were 6,000 years ago; poised on making the same mistakes as our "primitive" ancestors; except with much more potent and dangerous tools.

I am painfully aware that this is quite an unpopular topic.  I don't present it as "doctrine"; but I feel strongly enough about it to put up with the flack.

 

 

[stinsonmarri]

On 9/24/2019 at 11:55 AM, JoeMo said:

The Bible proves it.  Reas Genesis 6:1-4 in any commonly accepted translation of the Bible.

The children of the supernatural beings who had married these women became famous heroes and warriors. They were called Nephilim and lived on the earth at that time and even later. (Gen 6:4 - CEV)

The ·Nephilim [L fallen ones; C the significance of the name is unclear] were on the earth in those days and also later. That was when the sons of God ·had sexual relations with [L came in to] the daughters of ·human beings [T man; C Hebrew: Adam; 1:27–28]. These women gave birth to children ·who became famous [L men of a name] and were the mighty warriors of long ago. [C The Nephilim of Num. 13:31–33, though not related genealogically, were giants, suggesting these pre-flood Nephilim were also.] (EXB)

In those days, and even later, there were giants on the earth who were descendants of human women and the heavenly beings. They were the great heroes and famous men of long ago.(GNT)

The Nephilim were on the earth at that time (and also immediately afterward), when those divine beings were having sexual relations with those human women, who gave birth to children for them. These children became the heroes and legendary figures of ancient times.(ISV)

In those days, and even afterwards, when the evil beings from the spirit world were sexually involved with human women, their children became giants, of whom so many legends are told.(TLB)

You can either believe what Genesis 6:1-4 has to say or you can reject it.  You have not "proven" the Sethite view, either.  How could the mating of 2 normal humans produce a race of giants?

I can't "prove" my point and neither can you.  Neither of us were there to witness it. I have to go on the word of scripture.

You ask why God would allow the angels to do this?  Why did God allow satan to deceive Eve?  Why did God allow the Hebrews to be enslaved by Egypt?  Why does God allow the wholesale slaughter of Christians?  Why did God allow slavery? Why did God allow the wholesale slaughter of His Chosen people in the holocaust?  God gave His sentient beings - angels and humans - a free will.  He only interferes with the consequences of choices when it threatens the existence of His special creation - humanity - or His chosen people - the Israelites.  That's why He sent the flood - to save humanity from being destroyed by these evil hybrid offspring of angels and humans.

One reason that angels do not marry in heaven could be that all angels are males.  I have never seen a female angel mentioned in scripture.

Joe: Let's look at the common accepted version Bible, that I have use on some occasion. It is the Contemporary English Version of the Bible. I use at various times when the meanings of the English language is more simplified. Now when you quoted a word that does not simplified not only the English language but is not at all a part of the ancient Hebrew language at all.

 

Supernatural (adj.) Early 15c. "of or given by God," from Medieval Latin supernaturalis "above or beyond nature, divine," from Latin super "above" (see super-) + natura "nature" (see nature (n.)). Originally with more of a religious sense, "of or given by God, divine; heavenly;" association with ghosts, etc., has predominated since 19c.

Supernatural (Noun) 1729, "a supernatural being," from supernatural (adj.). From 1830 as "that which is above or beyond the established course of nature."

Super-word-forming element meaning "above, over, beyond," from Latin super (adverb and preposition) "above, over, on the top (of), beyond, besides, in addition to," from *(s)uper-, variant form of PIE root *uper "over." In English words from Old French, it appears as sur-. The primary sense seems to have shifted over time from usually meaning "beyond" to usually meaning "very much," which can be contradictory. E.g. supersexual, which is attested from 1895 as "transcending sexuality," from 1968 as "very sexual."

Nature (n.) Late 13c., "restorative powers of the body, bodily processes; powers of growth;" from Old French nature "nature, being, principle of life; character, essence," from Latin natura "course of things; natural character, constitution, quality; the universe," literally "birth," from natus "born," past participle of nasci "to be born," from PIE root *gene- "give birth, beget." Etymology Online Dictionary

Joe; the word supernatural was formed as indicated during the middle ages. Remember I also told you that these people became Catholic but kept their pagan beliefs. Look at supernatural it is a believe in their god and ghost. That’s even why because THE HOLY SPIRIT is A SPIRITUAL BEING also THE FATHER and THE SON. The word ghost was attached to THE HOLY SPIRIT and then here comes the Hindu similarity concept of a three persons one body trinity being. Why because fallen angels want to distort the truth in every way that they can from the true creation that is clearly seen; Paul said. Now if look at the word nature it deals with life, but life must give birth or beget. Where do you read that angels give birth anywhere? Only this particular Scripture that clearly states that YAHWEH sorry that HE made flesh, did not say anything about angels only to destroy flesh! You first want to state the Hebrew word “bên,” in which I have said it means the following:

From H1129; a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etc., (like H1, H251, etc.): -    + afflicted, age, [Ahoh-] [Ammon-] [Hachmon-] [Lev-]ite, [anoint-]ed one, appointed to, (+) arrow, [Assyr-] [Babylon-] [Egypt-] [Grec-]ian, one born, bough, branch, breed, + (young) bullock, + (young) calf, X came up in, child, colt, X common, X corn, daughter, X of first, + firstborn, foal, + very fruitful, + postage, X in, + kid, + lamb, (+) man, meet, + mighty, + nephew, old, (+) people, + rebel, + robber, X servant born, X soldier, son, + spark, + steward, + stranger, X surely, them of, + tumultuous one, + valiant[-est], whelp, worthy, young (one), youth.

Bânâh (H1129): A primitive root; to build (literally and figuratively): - (begin to) build (-er), obtain children, make, repair, set (up), X surely. Strong Hebrew Dictionary

When the Hebrew word is given one thing Strong does is present the root word which is extremely important. As I have explained to you earlier the Hebrew words are consistent in their meaning and thought. Even though Paul could speak many different languages when he wrote to the Hebrews, he portrayed in this book what they should have known from the beginning. He told them that the prophet in ancient times spoke to their fathers through the prophets. They knew in Gen Chapter 2:1 that this verse meant YAHWEH’S SON had completed the Universe and the earth was the very last world created and made and HE was finish! They also knew that the other worlds had created beings and Moses proved that clearly. Moses made it clear that when the sons of YAHWEH can to present themselves before THE FATHER, the Adams at one time came also! We do not know how long our fore parents lived in the Garden of Eden before they sin, and Moses knew the true story after sin. Moses knew that only these unfallen beings would come together to worship YAHWEH and to give a report about their individual world. Satan disguised himself and tried to sneak into Heaven, but YAHSHUA stopped him!

The point is these unfallen beings also generated children and were made like us in the IMAGE and LIKENESS of THE ALMIGHTY ONES! Angels do not regenerate or produce and the Paul say only to the Hebrews who knew that no time did THE FATHER ever call an angel his son. It is not in the meaning and YAHSHUA said angels do not marry! Marriage is for the production of children and this is stated clearly even in the English language “male,” and “female,” which mean their production organs!

Hebraic thought differs from our own process of thinking in that the Hebrews were concrete thinkers in contrast to our own abstract way of thinking. Concrete thought relates all words, concepts and ideas to something that can be sensed by the five senses.

At times you are going to come across a word in this translation that seems to make absolutely no sense. This is mostly due to the differences between our modern Greco-Roman perspective of thought and the ancient Hebrew’s perspective of thought. Also keep in mind that each Hebrew word is translated exactly the same way every time, so there will be instances when the word seems out of context. What you will need to do is study that word and the context which it is used in, so you can better understand its Hebraic meaning. The Ancient Hebrew Language By Jeff A. Benner

The Nephilim were on the earth at that time (and also immediately afterward), when those divine beings were having sexual relations with those human women, who gave birth to children for them. These children became the heroes and legendary figures of ancient times.(ISV)

Now Joe if this does not sound like ancient Greek and Latin mythology, truly I do not know what does!

Why did YAHWEH allow the Adams to be tested? For their loyalty because this world was created after Satan and 1/3 of the angels had sinned. The other worlds remain loyal but they knew Satan before he fail, the Adams didn’t but they were made perfect just like the beings on the other worlds. They knew about Satan and we want to make their failure something pitiful. They chose to listen to the serpent, both Adams were at the tree and they both felt that YAHWEH was keeping them from being equal with THEM. The same exact problem perfect angels felt in Heaven. They chose along with Satan to rebel.

Finally, how do you know even if they are male because that word is English, and it means:

Of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring. From Oxford Dictionary

“Zâkâr,” states it means the same for animals and men sex organs. Now, you have read in the Bible of only two Cherubim Lucifer, and Gabriel and we know 1/3 fail along with Lucifer. Now the Hebrew word “gabrı̂y'EL and hêylêl ” need to be discuss. GabriyEL in Dan 8:15 actually does not used the Hebrew word (adam), instead what is used is the Hebrew word H1397 “geber,” and here Strong like all men do, they think they are above the female when they both were call Adam! This word means person and does not indicate male or female. Neither does “hêylêl, ” Lucifer that Strong actually states it stands for morning star and Isa. 14:12 does say "son of the morning," and not ELOHIYM! Now wouldn’t you think he would be call HIS son here. No because Isaiah new exactly what Moses and Paul knew that angels were morning stars with their brightness and son’s of ELOHIYM were all beings on all the worlds that were created in THEIR IMAGE and LIKENESS who could procreate!

Blessings and Happy Sabbath!

[stinsonmarri]

On 9/24/2019 at 8:26 PM, 8thdaypriest said:

 I believe the angels are asexual - neither male nor female, and non-reproducing.  If - BIG if, such inbreeding with human woman were possible (which at present I still doubt), the asexual fallen angels would have to incarnate into human flesh - as adults (not babies), in order to be of the same "kind".  In this creation "kind" can reproduce only "after their kind".  

  It could be that Satan simply wanted to pollute the human bloodline, to force Jesus into dying for fallen angels too.  It could be the fallen angels saw how pleasurable sex was, and wanted to engage.  It could be that Satan wanted to pollute the human race to bring it to a point where the LORD would have to destroy it - all of it.  The LORD did almost destroy the human race - in the Flood.

We agree that they have no gender which is what asexual means. I do not understand your next paragraph because it does not have substance. If the Flesh being almost were wiped out, then you stated; "the asexual fallen angels would have to incarnate into human flesh - as adults (not babies), in order to be of the same "kind".  In this creation "kind" can reproduce only "after their kind." Partly, I agree with the asexual and kind reproduce the same kind. That was excellent! But the incarnate into human flesh angels are not capable of doing because they were created. THE HOLY SPIRIT place THE SON in Mary's womb but the Bible said that YAHWEH THE FATHER prepared a body for HIS SON. Heb 10:5 THESE THREE ALMIGHTY BEINGS all work together and THEY only can created. I have a problem with the Catholic word incarnate period. FATHER prepared the body for THE SON and THE HOLY SPIRIT placed it in the womb!  Angels do had that power or we would be in a worst mess then we are now and probably we would be completely destroyed along with the angels much earlier!

Blessings and Happy Sabbath!

Edited September 28, 2019 by stinsonmarri