June 15, 2017 at 10:56 am #819603
Both of you are offended at the idea that Genesis 6 and 10 are talking about angels. You are entitled to be so. But you are also expected to put forth a working theory as to what the text is saying. How about posting what you think is going on in both chapters, (perhaps outline each chapter in a separate post). It doesn’t have to be an essay, just a basic outline. That way we can compare your outline with the angel outline and see which matches the scripture.
What I think is going on here is no different to any carnal thinking. If I were to discuss Evolution with a staunch Atheist, he too would be just as offended and think anything to the contrary was crazy. If I were to discuss with a Trinitarian that God is not a Trinity, then he would be offended too and think that I am just misinformed and try to help me by giving me some lame explanation that has convinced himself.
This is the human thing to do, but are we not better than that? Do we have the Spirit of God or not? Should we just frame scripture with what is acceptable to our own mind and spirit, or should be be pupils who admit to know little and be open to what the text is actually saying because it is scripture. I think the latter and that we should test all things to see which stand when the truth of scripture is studied. And even of you study a view that turns out to not be true in the search for truth, then you have ample experience to free people under that false teaching. But if we let our own understanding lead us, then we will only be led by our own spirit and not the Spirit of God.
The guy in the video whether he is wrong or right has studied and given a logical argument as to why he believes as he does. His view does fit what is being said in the text, but he could still be wrong. You both have not even come close to that. You spend your time being offended of this view instead of seriously studying the word and using scripture to correct, enforce, and rebuke.
How about laying all prejudices aside and give the scripture and interpretations of the scripture a fair hearing regardless of the repercussions. A person who searches for truth not only searches for it, but accepts it and lets it change him. Simple as that. Life is a journey that changes us.June 15, 2017 at 12:25 pm #819604
t8, don’t you mean, ‘…discuss CREATIONISM with a staunch atheist..’?
In any case, my point is that ‘There WAS NOTHING TO DISCUSS in the first place’ concerning whether the ‘men’ who came to Sodom and stayed with LOT were Angels (fallen or holy!!).
The text is CLEAR AS CRYSTAL that they were ‘Holy Angels’ sent by Yahweh God – as the fulfilment of the discussion earlier between ‘God’ and Abraham.
Just WHERE is there any point of debate surrounding this text? Some numbskull posts a mischievous video of his singularly fetted imagination – and it suddenly ignites the minds of people calling themselves ‘Seekers of the truth’?
This is exactly the kind of ‘bad seed’ that is germinated by those who cannot distinguish worthwhile topics from sheer gibberish!
‘Strange flesh’…! What’s the problem? Scriptures states that the Union of flesh is between a man and a woman (for the creation of offspring – children) albeit that ‘pleasure’ between the two is a benefit (‘Enjoy the wife of your youth’).
It is this obvious that any ‘union of flesh’ that is not ‘properly’ between a man and his wife – is ‘Strange Flesh’. But since it is EXPLICITLY mentioned that the wicked men wanted the two male strangers then it can only be that of the worse kind: Buggery.
If there be a point of discussion then it might be (to modern ears and mind) that LOT offered his daughters to gratify the wicked men.June 15, 2017 at 12:31 pm #819605
t8, don’t you mean, ‘…discuss CREATIONISM with a staunch atheist..’?
No, I meant discussing / questioning Evolution with an Atheist. Although your example is in the same bracket.June 16, 2017 at 4:04 pm #819617
The text is CLEAR AS CRYSTAL that they were ‘Holy Angels’ sent by Yahweh God
lol. What part are you not getting. No one, not the video or myself is saying that the angels that they were fallen angels.
I have said this about 5 times now. Let’s see if we can get another five aye?June 16, 2017 at 4:51 pm #819619
The dude in the video said that the strange flesh in Jude represented angels and he gave the example of the angels that came to Lot as proof, saying the men wanted to have sex with the angels behind Lot’s door.
Do you believe that the strange flesh in Jude is a reference to angels or was it more likely animals and beastiality?
Do you believe that the men pounding on Lot’s door were demanding to have sex with holy angels? or do you think that they that they were mere men?June 17, 2017 at 5:34 am #819626
I was going to edit my last post, for some reason it’s not letting me.
t8 do you think that the men pounding on Lot’s door thought the angels were actually angels or did they think they were men?June 20, 2017 at 7:23 pm #819629
The Edit function times out after a while. So you can usually fix up grammatical or spelling errors. This site use to have an eternal edit, but some members abused that function when they lost a debate. They got caught changing their posts that were refuted.June 20, 2017 at 7:26 pm #819630
t8 do you think that the men pounding on Lot’s door thought the angels were actually angels or did they think they were men?
I have traditionally thought that it was because they were men and Sodom to this day is synonymous with ‘homosexuality’.
However, I am open minded to it meaning otherwise. Jael was offended by being open minded, but I think that is arrogance which leads to ignorance.
I guess you have to find out if ‘strange flesh’ can mean ‘homosexuality’ or is it used in other contexts.June 20, 2017 at 11:57 pm #819631
t8, I guess the purpose of your investigation into ‘strange flesh’ is to keep the thread going as nothing else is happening here.
It appears Jodi is over-interested in the aspect whether the wicked men wanted to have sex with the two ‘men’ who were staying with LOT – and would it have made any difference if they knew the ‘men’ we’re really Holy, or Fallen, Angels.
And despite the text of the verses clearly stating that the wicked men called out to LOT saying they wanted the ‘men’ for illegitimate sexual reasons, and other text showing that such wretched acts were highly prevalent in Sodom, you STILL want to delve into what ‘strange flesh’ means?
Well, even if, and likely is, it extended to include ‘Beastiality’, the meaning is CRYSTAL CLEAR: It means the mis-use of ANY KIND of object (animate or inanimate) for wrongful purposes.
There is nothing hard to understand here. I’m sorry to say that if you are struggling to understand – and need to have ‘am open mind’ about obviousness that amounts to no worthy purpose then you will certainly struggle even more with spiritual matters of a higher order – unless of course you are being mis-led by the spirit of procrastination and over-philosophising.
The reason for the euphemism used by Jude is simply to avoid using crude and overtly sexual terms to his audience. The people of his time would have understood clearly that Jude was referring to illegal sex acts whether male with female – female with female – male with male – male/female with animals – male/female with objects.
It is also clear, Jodi, that the wicked men DID NOT KNOW that the ‘men’ with LOT were HOLY ANGELS. You can read yourself that ALL encounters with Angels were met with intimate FEAR and DREAD. ‘NO,’ the wicked men would NOT have sought to engage in ‘Strange [Angel] Flesh’. Angels in the guise of humans (always MALE ‘gendered’) is used to mitigate such fear and dread. In the case of LOT it showed that LOT extended his care to strangers (‘Entertaining Angels unawares) showing he was head of a set of ‘worthy persons’ in Sodom (less than the 10 required to save Sodom from destruction). Also, the appearance gave the opportunity to show the wildly wicked manner of the people in Sodom. The situation would be criminally different if the ‘men’ came as pure spirit angels in the manner of the case of Balaam and some of the Prophets. The episode serves as a base for other times:,’It will be more lenient for those in the days of Sodom’!
Ok, I will watch and see how much more you can try to deconstruct simplicity.June 21, 2017 at 12:47 am #819632
I think Leviticus 20:9-… gives a good idea of ‘Strange Flesh’, particularly the last few verses of this law.
Remember that before Moses, there were no laws given in plain human language. Obviously these abominations were covered by the ‘the knowledge of good and evil’ wherein ‘commonsense’ dictates that these were wrong.
Alas, we are returning to those days……!June 21, 2017 at 3:51 pm #819634
I’m not overly interested in anything. It seems more ridiculous that you cannot comprehend that I am simply trying to see what t8 agrees with specifically in the video. It seems you have also failed to acknowledge the fact that I have said in my arguments that the wicked men according to scripture recognized the angels ONLY as men. That was clearly identified as my belief and what I was asking was for t8 to clarify his.
If t8 has a video that he thinks has some good points to better his argument than he should by all means post them. The dude in the video has over 100,000 subscribers, which seems like a pretty descent amount. It is good to know the views of others and the scriptures and reasoning they use to support their position. I honestly had a hard time making sense of your point that watching the video is bad, how is it any different from reading opposite views on this forum and responding to them? That is exactly what you do and makes your comment quite hypocritical.June 21, 2017 at 11:13 pm #819638
Hi Jodi, I hear what you say about not being overly interested in anything. And indeed there isn’t anything overly interesting in this section of the thread – it’s just being drawn out as there isn’t anything else going on.
The video is a trivial piece of nonsense – one of a thousand or more in which really unworthy and indeed unscriptural pointless claims are suggested.
THE FOOLISH THING is to try to investigate these pointless claims to see if there is any validity to these unscriptural and unworthy pointless claims.
My point was that for someone as interested and deep-thinking as t8 shows himself to be, it is amazing to me that such s fruitless brier of a claim should be posted by such a learned person for ‘investigation’.
Scriptures warns us against taking such a path as it opens the doorway to the possibility of BELIEVING there is merit in unscriptural seeds (sorry for the mixed metaphors!)
So, Jodi, did you understand the summary I gave you from scriptures regarding the pointless subject that should never have been put foreward?
Do you agree that even the term ‘Strange Flesh’ is nothing sinister but simply a euphemism for the set of explicit immoral sexual acts.
Remember that Holy Angels are ‘SPIRIT’ – they do not have ‘FLESH’. Even the appearance of flesh (under clothing) is just so – ‘appearance’!
I AM a little confused as to EXACTLY what the point of the discussion is between you,t8 and the guy in the video, but one thing is crystal clear: the video is simply designed to entrance the minds of those seeking weird and wacky alternative and malicious views scriptural matters.
However, I will withdraw my protestation with a quote from scriptures (which may require legitimate investigation!):
“Do not resist evil”….June 22, 2017 at 2:08 am #819639
Many, many people believe the conclusions this dude makes and are under the impression that his stance is scripturally sound. Some of his points are of the majority of what Christians believe, while yes other claims are pointless, “weird and wack”. I would have to disagree with your point, we are to test all things. Yes we need to be aware of deception as well within false doctrines, but that doesn’t mean we should not dissect opposite views. Honestly your point still doesnt make sense to me. Someone is not going to be drawn away from absured points, but they might be drawn away by more clever ones, if they don’t have a solid foundation in that topic in the first place. How would you even know if they were absurd or more convincing if you just took a stance not to read anything? What happens in the video is that when the guy starts making weak points his other points are weakened because he no longer seems at all credible. If someone is immersed in the truth and under the guidance of God they don’t need to fear dissecting oppositional views. What could result is an ability to help the blind find truth. If someone who is blind but thinks of course they are not and follows your advice they might be more likely to walk in their blindess.
What happened when I watched the video? I looked up many scriptures, I became more well versed in them. I dove into a few scriptures I hadn’t looked to deeply at before and learned something new from those scriptures. I also looked up and read a Hebrew article talking about their traditions, giving further understanding about their culture. I read more about the Book of Enoch and discovered more precisely it’s errors and why it was not canonized in the first place. I also went onto another one of this guys videos and joined in on the discussion. Some accused me of being of the devil, while at least one person was intrigued and thought I was making a lot more sense and I got him thinking.
Just because YOU think a subject is pointless doesn’t make it a pointless subject! I understand you are wanting to discuss something that is more appealing to you and isn’t a waist of your time.
I respect t8, He posted the video believing there are some good points and I wanted to dissect it with him and we could at least find where we agree and have to disagree. Obviously not everyone is of the same mind as you, or in your position of knowledge, I find it disrespectful to assume others are, when you actually know full well they are not. So because this is a pointless topic to YOU we should just ignore our inclination to look at it? We should look to you as the authority on what we should or should not discuss? Should we all on this forum check with you first and clear a topic or a topic within a topic, to make sure it’s not considered pointless by you?
I am going to start a new topic today, I hope you won’t think it’s pointless and you will be willing to discuss it with me!!June 22, 2017 at 3:45 am #819640
I hear you, Jodi…
As a last on this element, can you outline to me somethings that you thought at the beginning and how your views have changed since learning that ‘Strange Flesh’ has nothing to do with anything other than immoral sexual activity…
Why did you imagine that anyone could have sex with an angel – given that angels are Spirit and do not have bodies?
Also, why it was ever conceivable that the holy angels could be mistaken for fallen angels?
You say you still don’t understand what I’m saying – there are those who desire to worship angels unknowingly but refuse to understand their nature and more importantly why scripture says not to enquirer into them (a controversy that surrounds the book of Enoch).June 22, 2017 at 8:10 am #819642
None of my views were changed they were made more confident as being true. I never misunderstood ever what the strange flesh meant, I knew exactly what it meant and it is the same as you. I was asking questions for others, particularly t8, to explain what HE THOUGHT it meant. I’m sorry for the confusion my posts brought. When I was asking questions it was not because I was searching for answers to those questions themselves, it was because I was wanting to know HOW t8 would answer them, what HE would say so that I could have a focus on what to disagree with. It was never conceivable BY ME that the holy angels would be mistaken for fallen angels. I was producing questions THROUGH the dude in the videos own logic, not my logic, yes you have recognized that the questions are quite stupid, that was a point I was trying to make! I think you finally did it Jael, lol, I think I am over talking about the video!!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.