May 11, 2016 at 10:14 am #814043
Wrong conclusion Kerwin. All flesh was corrupt, not just one genealogy or line. This argument is the best that men can come up with that want to refute what the text actually says. But it is riddled with flaws and assumptions. It would take too long to post a reply to you on this in my own words, so I have copied and pasted from this page to save me having to word it myself. While I haven’t read the whole page from where I take this text, what I do copy is pretty much what I want to communicate to you.
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
It is clear from the text that these daughters were not limited a particular family or subset, but were, indeed, from (all) the Benoth Adam, “the daughters of Adam.” There is no apparent exclusion of the daughters of Seth. Furthermore, the line of Cain was not necessarily known for its ungodliness. From a study of the naming of Cain’s children, many of which included the name of God, it is not clear that they were all necessarily unfaithful.
Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence. God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth. Then God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth.
There is no evidence, stated or implied, that the line of Seth was godly. Only one person was translated from the judgment to come (Enoch) and only eight were given the protection of the ark. No one beyond Noah’s immediate family was accounted worthy to be saved. In fact, the text implies that these were distinct from all others. (There is no evidence that the wives of Noah’s sons were from the line of Seth.) Even so, Gaebelein observes, “The designation ‘Sons of God’ is never applied in the Old Testament to believers,” whose sonship is “distinctly a New Testament revelation.” If the lines of Seth were so faithful, why did they perish in the flood?
The most fatal flaw in the specious “Sethite” view is the emergence of the Nephilim as a result of the unions. (Bending the translation to “giants” does not resolve the difficulties.) It is the offspring of these peculiar unions in Genesis 6:4 which seems to be cited as a primary cause for the Flood.
Procreation by parents of differing religious views do not produce unnatural offspring. Believers marrying unbelievers may produce “monsters,” but hardly superhuman, or unnatural, children! It was this unnatural procreation and the resulting abnormal creatures that were designated as a principal reason for the judgment of the Flood.
The very absence of any such adulteration of the human genealogy in Noah’s case is also documented in Genesis 6:9: Noah’s family tree was distinctively unblemished. The term used,tamiym, is used for physical blemishes.May 25, 2016 at 3:37 pm #814441
A Black Hole In The Book of Enoch?
July 15, 2017 at 7:41 pm #819710
Did Jesus quote from the Book of Enoch?October 14, 2017 at 8:41 pm #819901Vladimir PakhomovParticipant
- Topics started 0
- Total replies 1
The video on YouTube (English text, Images, Music)
“Message to the Unborn 2”
Tags: Message of the Watchers, Book of Enoch, calendar, decryption.
This video shows the process of deciphering the Message of the Watchers.
Now the millennia-old story begun by Enoch is completed.October 24, 2017 at 7:18 pm #819922
I started this, but it wasn’t too engaging in the beginning. I wonder if I should try no1 first to get the context?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.