Leaderboard

Marty Mittleman was coming back from his nephew’s bar mitzvah party where he may have had a few too many l’chaims and he rear-ended the car in front of him. Being that he was a lawyer, Marty got out of his car, walked over to the driver of the other car and said, "Boy, are you in trouble! I'm a lawyer!" The driver looked out his window and said, "I’m not so sure about that. I'm a judge."

Miriam hasn’t been sleeping well thanks to her husband Moishe so she goes to her doctor for help. "Dr. Feldman, I can’t sleep. My husband Moishe has a habit of talking in his sleep! What should I give him to cure it?" Dr. Feldman replies: "Miriam, why don’t you try giving him an opportunity to speak when he's awake."

I appreciate your perspective. The state of the SDA Church today is indeed rather sorry, but I trust that God still has His plans for its purification.

I don't think that the SDA church was a false movement at all - any more than I think the Protestant Reformation was a false movement. Martin Luther was a beer-swilling Jew hater; yet, he is considered the originator of the protestant reformation (and rightly so). One sign of the end is that knowledge will increase; and IMHO that includes spiritual knowledge. The establishment of the SDA Church was just one more step in the progression of God's people. But ... as in all religions that reach "critical mass", the church has become a business rather than an outreach; so solvency is as or more important than keeping up with the signs of the times.

I think the average Israelite knew much more about what the temple services were all about than we think. They had Moses to teach them and he was one who spent a lot of time with God face to face learning all about what the Sanctuary was all about. While the Bible is very descriptive of the temple and its furniture, I see no reason why Moses would not have had very detailed instructions in the meanings of the temple services. The Closed Door is not really one of our beliefs today. However, End of Probation and Investigative Judgement are very much a part of the Scriptures. And the "absolute sinless perfection of God's Church" I also believe is very much a part of Scripture. If they are not part of Scripture, it does not matter who is promoting it, it would be a spurious teaching that should not be a part of our belief system. You just have to look for it. I do not believe the early pioneers of our church were wrong in those beliefs.

Also, are we ready for Jesus to come, whatever the actual scenario turns out to be? Are we faithful to believe that God is in control even if we are not? If we truly love and believe in/depend on our Lord Jesus, His Spirit will guide us into all truth. Currently, I could be mistaken, you could be mistaken, or we both could be mistaken. We may not be "uniform" in our personal beliefs, but we are "united in our search for the Way, the Truth, and the Light.

Thank you for speaking out against the low insinuations. I am now being slandered for doing so, but I'm not even going to bother reading the whole comment. It is enough for a servant to be (slandered) like his Master. Indeed it is an honour. Of course Ellen White was not infallible as a person. None of the prophets was perfect. They did speak for God, but neither you nor I should accept a doctrine just because Sister White taught it. That was not the purpose of her writings. I accept the SDA explanation of the disappointment because it rings true. Their error was the assumption that the earth is the sanctuary -- an assumption also shared by their opponents, a fact which suggests that no one had a good reason to reject the message. Biblically, the earth is not the sanctuary. There is a sanctuary in heaven, to the activities of which God apparently wishes to call our attention. You ask: "Is the SDA sanctuary message really so important as to be salvational?" Honestly, I don't think we have any business trying to answer such a question concerning any true Bible doctrine. If it's true, we should accept it. Then maybe once we've shown our honesty, the importance of the matter will eventually dawn on us. Why would God raise up an entire movement (you do favour the SDA Church, I understand) in order to preach something that doesn't matter? Indeed, what could matter more to us, right now, than what Jesus is doing for us in heaven?

Rebbetzin Rosen was trying to come up with an appropriate booklist for the new book club she was starting with the sisterhood at the shul so she decided to canvas some of the members about their favorite books. The Rebbetzin asked Shirley Cohen, "Which book has helped you most in your life?" Shirley replied, "My husband's check book!!"

The following is from my personal experience. Since SDA membership is a local congregation matter, practice varies from congregation to congregation. Alcohol - I know of no congregation that disfellowshipped members for alcohol consumption. But they would be excluded from leadership positions. I suppose though, were a member to be "in your face" about it, such as ordering wine at the restaurant with other members, bringing beer to the church-family picnic or pouring a scotch for oneself during a pastoral visit, the congregation would likely take disciplinary action. I wouldn't recommend bringing one's own fermented wine to communion. Working on the Sabbath - again likely this would exclude one from leadership positions, but I doubt the church body would be moved to disfellowship. But if one is being disruptive, such as taking business calls on sabbath and loudly discussing and negotiating business matters on the phone during the Sabbath fellowship luncheon, the congregation may take action. I wouldn't recommend passing out business cards and advertisements in the church lobby after the service. Trinitarianism - no one cares if you keep your views to yourself. But if you're disrupting sabbath school with anti-trinitarian views, and if during sabbath afternoon fellowship you won't shut up about arianism or whatever one's pet theory is, the congregation may take action. Transsubstantiation - if you keep your beliefs to yourself, no one will care. If, during communion you yell out "hoc est corpus meum", the congregation may take action. Infant baptism - if you baptize your baby at home, no one will really care. But if during a baby dedication you rush to the front of the church to sprinkle the baby with water before the deacons can intercept you and wrestle you to the ground, the congregation may take action. Multiple wives - sex, divorce, adultery, etc. are about the only things that I've seen resulting in a disfellowshipping. I believe few congregations in North America would countenance polygamy. EGW - I've known many SDAs who don't acknowledge EGW as a prophet. As long as they don't disrupt sabbath school class or pester people with their pet theories, no one cares.

Seeing that teaching the gospel to Israel (and the world) was God's entire purpose in instituting the earthly sanctuary and its ceremonial law, I have to think that it did succeed in accomplishing something, at least for a time. In other words, someone must have understood its significance and received a benefit from it. Eventually, of course, the Jewish people entirely lost sight of why they were going through the motions, and tried to turn it into righteousness by works, and that is when God chose to sweep that entire system of worship away. Today, we look back to the cross. We do not sacrifice animals nor keep the annual feasts. Adventism did not add the investigative judgment. We discovered it in the Word. Not everyone who names the name of Christ is really a Christian. Of course every case would have be investigated and decided for weal or woe before Christ could come the 2nd time, bringing His reward with Him. (See Revelation 22:12.) Just as obviously, probation would have to close before the cases of the living could be decided, and the close of probation is clearly found in Revelation 22:11. I do not understand this as an arbitrary decision to close off anyone's opportunity to repent, but a recognition on God's part that everyone who is ever going to repent has already done so. In other words, earth's harvest is ripe. For those who have blasphemed the Holy Spirit, Jesus taught that there is no forgiveness. Their door has closed. For the rest of us, while the door to the Holy Place is closed, the door to the Most Holy is wide open. So never fear. Your comment about absolute sinless perfection has me thinking. When earth's harvest is ripe, those who are with Christ may very well have been brought to the place where, upheld by God's grace, they are entirely victorious over the sin in their lives. They've learned how to walk on water by faith. However, this could never mean that they are absolutely perfect in themselves. The closer we come to Christ, the more sinful we appear in our own eyes. No, they are perfect in Christ, even as justification by faith makes us counted as being perfect in Christ, even now, regardless of our remaining defects of character. Romans 8:29 and Ephesians 1:3-6 teach that, for those whom God foreknew would be willing to receive His grace, we are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son (i.e. perfect in Christ). This is God's promise that, by the power of His love, we can be wholly transformed in character, to the praise of His glory. And I've used that last phrase intentionally. It's not so we can be justified. We are justified freely by the atonement of the cross. We long to be made perfect in love so that we can give glory to God. There is absolutely no place for creature merit.

But the sanctuary was so much more than just how sins were forgiven. It is a symbol of the entire Christian experience, be it justification, sanctification, and even glorification. Which is why serious study of the sanctuary message should not be just glibly passed by as some relic of the Old Testament.

I would have no problems with a bear going the other way, but if coming towards me I would have to assume the worst.

One could say that Isaiah 53 combines the 2 themes; but most Jews I know don't "understand" Isaiah 53.

Maybe back in Moses' day. But 500 years later, I don't think that was the case. If the average Jew understood the sanctuary model given in the OT, they never would have allowed Christ to be crucified, IMHO.

We got bears in our neighborhood as well. Unfortunately, it is against the law here in CO to shoot a bear unless it is attacking you. A guy here is in jail cuz he shot a bear that was attacking his dog in his back yard.

I agree with JoeMo in that the average Israelite did not interpret the sanctuary in terms of symbolism pointing to Christ. If Moses indeed "had very detailed instructions in the meanings of the temple services." he did not pass these on to the Israelites in any of the Bible books he wrote. IMO, the OT does not connect the "Messiah" theme with the "Sanctuary" theme. The sanctuary was how sins were forgiven, and, separate and unrelated, "Messiah" would someday come to restore Israel. Jesus was revolutionary in that he combined these two themes into one, and then claimed to be BOTH Messiah/Restorer of Israel AND Sacrificial Lamb of God, something that no OT writer had done.

HEY ALL MEMBERS of the UNITED STATES Today MAY 27 is Memorial Day===let us remembers all the men and women in the ARMED SERVICES that have died===== also if you are doing anything special today let us know dgrimm60

The policeman advised me to carry one because I like to walk along a road that goes thru an area also inhabited by bears. And they have baby bears with them! The bears also get into trash cans in our neighborhood and generally make a nuisance of themselves. One person looked out his window one morning and watched a bear walking away carrying his garbage can! Unfortunately, it takes a big gun to stop a bear. I already figured a 22 was not helpful with a bear. A gun store owner said a 357 would just make them mad. So, it looks to be a 45. Those are pretty big guns.

B/W, I agree that the sanctuary message as presented in the OT is a very detailed model of the plan of salvation; but only using my 20/20 hindsight do I see the symbolism. I would imagine that the average Israelite had no clue that the annual cycle of feasts was a model of the plan of salvation; especially after the split between Israel and Judah; and the worship of foreign gods (even by the priests) became prevalent. What I'm not so sure of is the "trimmings" added by Adventism (e.g., the Investigative Judgement, the Closed Door, the End of Probation, and absolute sinless perfection of God's Church prior to translation). I haven't heard a message preached on these subjects for years. I don't fault people who do believe this; I just don't believe it myself; nor do many of the SDA's I know.

The sad thing is you nor I can stop it, and all the guns in the world won't either! I fear YAHWEH more than human beings. This all about sin Joe that is showing how terrible it is and people that have guns have been kill to, that's what you don't see. In the Muslim countries, innocent children are being killed, in South America, innocent children are being raped and killed, in Afrika, innocent children are being raped and killed, in Europe, innocent children are being killed, in America, innocent children are being killed. Violence and guns are everywhere and been armed have not stopped innocent people from being killed. I can go to a grocery store, or a movie house and be killed. You cannot stop sin, it is everywhere, what I am trying to present is freedom in YAHSHUA! Each one reaches one that's it! If you think this is bad, buckle your seat for the Time of Trouble and THE WRATH of THE LAMB and THE FATHER! Who will be able to stand, I want to stand I am tired of this evil world and I choose to stand on THE ALMIGHTY MOST HIGH SIDE! You see we were told that sin causes death and some of us will die, if I do then I die in YAHSHUA! If I am selected as one of the 144,000 then I will continue and reap the harvest of souls. This world today is not my home, I am just passing through! I chose to obey and worship THE MOST HIGH and l left behind the life of crime. I was raised in a good home, we were middle class, I went to church school, I had the best education. There is no excuse for what I did, I was not some ghetto kid. My mother gave me the best of everything, I have been truly bless as a Black woman! Anger and hatred of how my ancestors were treated was my excuse to turn my back on THE MOST HIGH! Not anymore and I despise guns but I cannot fringe on others who have a right to them. But not assault weapons and how many guns do you need to protect yourselves? Yes, now they use cars and trucks but guns are still the worst mass killing! When you got a man who cusses, is angry, lies, cheats, covers up, brags and more we have a problem. But, I am only one person and my goal is to encourage people and give them hope through YAHSHUA! So again, I urge everyone here to pray for each other, humble yourselves, love one another and obey YAHWEH'S Commandments! That's what I have to offer and I truly love everyone here, even though's who I might differ with. Love is my gift that YAHWEH so loved the world, that HE gave HIS only SON, that we all will not perish if we choose to love and obey! That is all I can say, Joe! Blessings to everyone!

That Bible verse is part of the Sanctuary message! I tend to believe that the Sanctuary message is a very detailed parable of the plan of Salvation. Unfortunately, Jesus said "he that hath ears, let him hear." There is a real symbolic meaning behind the entire Sanctuary message. I believe this because I do not believe that God wastes His time on useless symbols that would only serve to confuse. I have been studying the Sanctuary message for sometime now and find it incredibly fascinating, and I have not even started studying what EGW wrote on the topic. Purposefully, I put her last. I also have come to the conclusion that the Sanctuary message, Revelation, and Last Generation Theology are all deeply interconnected. Good times studying all of this material!

Was he or was he not a vile man. Oh, wait! We have all been vile and sinners. But let's stone Trump first! I agree that whatever he MAY have been, he does take the office seriously and he is doing what he sees as the best way to save this country. Many rise to the occasion, which the Dems apparently have not as they have screamed hysterical lies for the last more than two years. And AG Barr is now on the hunt! That said, the country is not savable and has already passed the tipping point as has the rest of the world. Only a matter of time until we are seriously into the end time events. There may be ups and downs as the whole situation goes out of control in its downward dive to destruction. The problem becomes how to stay above the fray. I tend to believe Ellot Waggoner when he, over one hundred years ago, said this world is not for Christians to control. Our world is in heaven, so leave this world to the perishing.

The armed citizenry is one of the reasons an armed invasion of this country is likely to fail! Much of the entire nation is an army. Good luck to the people with no arms at that time. FWIW, I do not own any guns, yet! I have been told it would be a good idea to carry one, by a policeman!

Humbleness of mind Col 3:12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;

Sad because Belgium is only the first Western European country that will fall to Islam. France, Great Britain, Sweden, and Germany are not that for behind.

You mis-read me, Marri. I hate the thought that children are killed; and my heart aches for the families of the dead and injured. It IS horrible. But the fact remains that people kill people - not guns. Law-abiding citizens may give up their guns; but that would leave them defenseless against the criminal and terrorist element (like those who carry out school and church shootings). Criminals and terrorists will NEVER voluntarily turn in their weapons. There is an increasing number of mass death due to people running cars and trucks through pedestrian crowds. If that trend grows, will we ban cars and trucks?

There are several tests that I can bring to your assertions. One thing you must know is that I know a whole lot more about Ellen White than I know about you, and I trust her. I trust not only her impeccable integrity and deep Christian experience, but I also trust her claim of supernatural insight. So... When she says that the main thrust of their message was "fear God and give glory to Him for the hour of His judgment is come," I believe her. So I reject your claim that there was no other message. If Ellen White rebuked those who rejected the preaching of the 2nd coming at a definite time because they didn't love Jesus, that would have been because they didn't love Jesus. Apparently no one was any better able than Miller himself to find any actual Scriptural fault with the message, even though an error later became apparent. Thus, even though a part of the message did fail for being unscriptural, THAT'S NOT WHY SOME PEOPLE REJECTED IT. I find your insinuation that the sanctuary message was a mere mechanism for trying to justify the disappointment offensive. You are really accusing the likes of Joseph Bates, James White, and Ellen White of being dishonest, but I'll take their obvious love, earnestness, and integrity over your allegations any day.

5 Things You Didn't Know About Dracula On May 26, 1897, Dracula, the classic Bram Stoker novel, went on sale in London. Here are 5 things you probably didn’t know about the story that became known as a masterpiece of Victorian-era Gothic literature... Rich Food May Have Inspired the Story Gothic fiction written during the Victorian era often evolved from someone’s nightmare, and Bram Stoker may not have been an exception. Harry Ludlam, his biographer, said Stoker felt a compulsion to write the story after he ate a rich crab dish at supper and had a nightmare involving a vampire rising from his tomb. Stoker left behind notes about the story he wrote, and it is unclear whether they were about his dream or the book he was working on. Stoker’s Vampire Wasn’t an Original Story On June 17, 1816, Lord Byron was staying at Lake Geneva, Switzerland, with friends Percy Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin and Dr. John Polidori, who was Byron’s physician, and challenged them to write a ghost story. Mary Godwin, who later became Mary Shelley, wrote Frankenstein, while Dr. Polidori wrote The Vampyre. The gloomy mood that brought forth these stories may have been influenced by the eruption of Mount Tamboro in Indonesia in 1815 that gave rise to severe weather disturbances that caused a year without a summer. Dracula Was Written Shortly After Jack the Ripper Terrorized London One influence on Stoker’s writing of Dracula in 1890 might have been the terror that swept London because of Jack the Ripper and his unspeakable crimes, which raised speculation about who the Ripper was and why he was killing women. Both Dracula and the Ripper stalked victims in Victorian England, killed them and then disappeared, seemingly without a trace. Also, the address where Dracula supposedly stored his coffins turns into Flower and Dean streets further up, which is where several of the Ripper’s victims lived. Count Dracula Could Be Based on Stoker’s Employer Henry Irving, who owned London’s Lyceum Theatre and was a well-known Shakespearean actor, was Stoker’s boss. Stoker was his secretary, press agent and manager, so he worked long hours, probably for little appreciation. Some have speculated that Henry Irving was the model for Dracula because he was described as egotistic and mesmerizing. But in any event, the famed actor apparently hated the performance of Dracula he saw on stage, calling it “dreadful.” A Real Exhumation May Have Been the Inspiration for Lucy’s Death The character of Lucy, who is devampirized by her suitor when he drives a stake into her heart, may be borrowed from a grizzly experience by artist and poet Dante Gabriel Rossetti in 1869. Rossetti’s red-haired wife had died a few years previously, and he placed love poems wound in her hair in the coffin with her. Unfortunately, he changed his mind some years later and had the body exhumed to retrieve the poems, and some of her hair came out in Rossetti’s hand when he did.

I am also troubled by this. There is John 7:17, that we can claim for ourselves. In the NASB, it reads: " If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself." Still, it often happens that two people who sincerely believe that they have met this condition are unable to agree on doctrine. Nor can we be absolutely certain that the other person is the one in error. A healthy self-distrust is essential. I believe that we need to question our own beliefs and interpretations, especially where they differ from an apparent consensus of the main body of Seventh-day Adventists (that I believe to be the true church). But we also need to think for ourselves, and be free moral agents when it comes to doctrine and Bible interpretation. So there is a fine balance to be sought. Also, it is not necessary that everyone in the church totally agree on every point, however minor. I do believe that every error has its consequences, and you will see me arguing in this forum for what I believe. But I can still fellowship with those who I believe are mistaken on some points.

Samie, I know not whether taking time to respond here will be profitable. You may be fully entrenched in your opinion and unwilling to look at any other possible manner of interpretation. I will say this: I will not spend long debating on this. FIRSTLY Most of what you included in evidence above is true and correct. We differ simply in interpretations. Similarly, biologists look at the same evidence and come up with opposite conclusions regarding the origin of life. So as pertains to the evidence, I largely agree with you. As regards your conclusions, we differ. I will make an attempt at explaining how the evidence can be interpreted in another way, supported by some additional evidences. EVIDENCES REGARDING "SONS OF GOD" Adam was called "the son of God." He was said to be made in God's image and likeness. Seth was made in Adam's likeness, not God's, according to Genesis 5:3. John 1:12 tells us "as many as received Him to them gave He power to become the sons of God." The distinction of being a "son of God" is granted to those who are in the image of His character. The Bible would not call fallen angels "sons of God" and yet call the righteous by the same term. So, even if angels could copulate with humans and procreate, it could not have been the fallen ones who are called "sons of God." Jesus Himself refers to the Jewish leaders as being children of the devil, the father of lies, in contrast to their thinking that they were children of God. And again, if angels could copulate with mankind, it would be nonsense to reason that heavenly angels had corrupted men to the point of bringing upon themselves God's wrath. Where we may agree regarding some of your evidences above is that some of those "daughters of men" may have descended from Seth. Essentially, the term speaks of the worldly-minded, which largely were of the line of Cain in those days but I would make no attempt to limit it strictly to such as if I were there to know. Any godless woman would have been a "daughter of men." OTHER BIBLICAL EXAMPLES Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. (Job 1:6, KJV) Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. (Job 2:1, KJV) Clearly, Satan was not classed as a "son of God," for he gets express mention of being "also" among them. That distinction would have been unnecessary had he been one of them. Furthermore... When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:7, KJV) ...this text does not refer to demons. THE CLEAREST BIBLE DEFINITION For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. (Romans 8:14, KJV) ANYONE CAN BE But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: (John 1:12, KJV) That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world; (Philippians 2:15, KJV) Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. (1 John 3:1, KJV) REGARDING "GIANTS" This term is not related to race, nor stature. It is not related particularly to Cain, nor to Seth, nor does it refer to angels particularly. The Bible itself provides a definition for its usage of the word, using parallel speech (parallelism). There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. (Genesis 6:4, KJV) The three highlighted terms in the above are used in parallel. One way of thinking of them would be almost as "celebrities" in the sense of "stars." Gesenius alludes they are fallen, rebels, apostates. (See http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H5303&t=KJV.) Consider also the parallels elsewhere: And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown: (Numbers 16:2, KJV) Obviously, those "men of renown" were "famous" and were apostate rebels, later consumed by fire from the Lord. The "giants" (rebels) of Noah's day all perished in the Flood on account of their crimes. MY CONCLUSIONS The "sons of God" are the righteous. The "giants," the "men of renown," are the worldly rebels who have made a name for themselves. The "daughters of men" are the unvirtuous women of the world. How do you know? We can only be certain of the fact that Noah and his sons had descended from Seth. We cannot know for sure whom the sons married.

Let me start by saying that in the Bible, there are at least three kinds of intelligent beings: men, angels, and Deities (God the Father, our Lord & Savior Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit). Compared to humans, angels excel in strength and power (Ps 103:20). Of course, both humans and angels were created by God. I pointed this out so that if the phrase “sons of God” as used in the OT is proven to be referring to humans, then they cannot refer to angels, or vice versa. In the context of Genesis 6, the intermarriage between the “sons of God” and the “daughters of men” seemed to have contributed greatly to the corruption of the earth prompting God to end the evils of that time. KJV Genesis 6:4-6 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. Based on the foregoing verses, the timing of the intermarriage between the “sons of God” and the “daughters of men” was around the time when God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, proving that indeed the intermarriage did not provide a let up of corruption but instead contributed to its getting even worse. Let us now consider the scenario painted by the popular belief that the “sons of God” as referring to the male descendants of Seth and perceived to be righteous, effectively excluding the male descendants of Cain whose descendants, it is assumed, were corrupt. Here’s Angel Manuel Rodriguez of the BRI: But can it be shown from Scriptures that the subject “sons of God” in Gen 6:1-4 indeed compose the righteous branch of Adam’s descendants, that is, Seth’s family line? Let us try to dig a-wee-bit deeper into Scriptures. Antedeluvians have long life spans. Starting from Adam, we have Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah. Adam was still alive until his great, great, great, great, great, great grandson Lamech was 56 years old. Seth was 744 years old when Lamech was born. Lamech was 168 years old when Seth died 14 years before Noah was born. Enos died when Noah was 84 years old. Cainan died when Noah was 179 years old. Mahalaleel died when Noah was 234 years old. Jared died when Noah was 366 years old. Enoch did not die. Methuselah died on the year of the Flood, outliving his son Lamech by 5 years. Lamech died 5 years before the Flood. From Adam to Lamech, the average life span was 907.5 years. This tells us that at the time just before the flood, people born 300 years before Noah, those born at most 70 years after Methuselah, were still alive! These include those who were supposed to have intermarried with the “daughters of men”, the “sons of God” who, proponents of “sons of God” = male descendants of Seth say, are righteous and who followed the Lord. But were they righteous in God’s sight? Here’s how Scriptures described the inhabitants: Genesis 6:7-12 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. {perfect: or, upright} 10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. We can easily deduce from the foregoing verses that all the earth was corrupt and that should include both Cain’s and Seth’s descendants, with one exception: NAS Genesis 7:1 Then the LORD said to Noah, "Enter the ark, you and all your household; for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time. The evidence of Scripture seems not to agree with the idea that the “sons of God” = Seth’s descendants and that they are righteous and are followers of the Lord. IMO, the position that the “sons of God” who intermarried with "daughters of men" are the male descendants of Seth is biblically untenable. So, to who does the phrase “sons of God” in Gen 6:1-4 refer to? My next post will address this issue.