- This topic is empty.
- Posts
People like to say the sons of God in Gen 6 were angels instead of acknowledging them as gods.These were the sons of El or his counsel of gods-the”us”who made man in their image. And they must have been very manlike indeed to have sex with women just like the Greek gods from Olympus and the book of Enoch even says they taught men arts and crafts like the various Greek gods did as well.
And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling–these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.
The Bible doesn’t have much to say on this subject and makes a few quotes that kind of seem out of place. Perhaps because the quotes are from the Book of Enoch. If so, then the Book of Enoch says that the angels were chained or trapped in the nether parts of the world, and it is their offspring, the Nephilim who are influencing people as demons. They lost their bodies during the flood and for which purpose the old world was destroyed in such a violent way. Flesh had become corrupted and Noah found favor as he was without blemish and was righteous.
There seems to be a great deal of confusion in the suggestion concerning the quoted text from Jude.
Firstly, the Angels are Spirit entities and therefore to be ‘bound with everlasting chains’ is not referring to anything of a physical nature.
Secondly, to be ‘in darkness’ is not concerning ‘the lack of visible light rays’ but rather ‘Ignorance’; ‘Lacking the potential to gain knowledge’.
Thirdly, ‘trapped in the nether part of the world’ suggests again that Spirit Angels are subject to physical bounds: a hugely and completely false suggestion.
It is clear that the author of the suggestion is themselves lacking the knowledge of the spiritual realm and has built the idea of a physical heaven. This is a scenario straight out of Greek mythology where the Titans are seen bound and chained in darkness in a some kind of pit.
So what is the more likely explanation of the quote from Jude? Well, it seems that the council of angels were all originally aware of Yahweh’s plans for the world (See ‘Book of Job’) and took part in the development on the earth and over the created world in general. They were free’ to access and interact in the physical world to achieve whatever aim Yahweh purposed for them. In Job, it is shown how a ‘demonic’ force (from whatever source!!) can influence events in the physical world in that Job was overcome by a string of negative acts under the control of ‘The Satan’.
After the Angels rebelled, it is perfectly reasonable that Yahweh should removed their freedom and access to knowledge of his current and future council – leading to these angels being ‘limited to the spirit world’ and thus unable to ‘directly’ influence any physical acts in the world, and, ‘limited to only their past knowledge of the council of Yahweh’.
Does this sound like an UNBOUNDED Spirit entity being ‘Bounded in everlasting [spiritual] chains and existing ‘in darkness’ (ignorance) of knowledge? A bird with its wings clipped; an phylosopher without access to current thinking: ‘chained in darkness’!
So the question that should be asked is, ‘Why are they called Demons and how do they possess a physical body’?
Well, that is easily answered: An agent with a level of unscrupulous desire can call upon these angels and effectively ‘invite’ them into their soul. These Angel cannot leave the spirit world of their own volition but can be invited into it to co-exist in the body of that entity and influence their behaviour. Basically, the invitee would have to have a level of intelligence such as that of a human being…not an animal or inanimate object (There is no such thing as a GHOST; or demonic bodiless entity in the physical world).
It is seen over and over that the influence of the person possessed by the demonic force will carry out acts (more often Negative) which are inconsistent with the natural acts of a human being. This naturally causes damage to the human but can at times make the person seem stronger or more knowledgeable (e.g. An Ogre, soothsayer, Witch, Wizard, etc) than normal humans. The outcome though is always damaging in the long run to the human.
When Jesus made the demons go out of the mad man and into the pigs the demons had very little influence over them and the result was madness of the pigs. The demons simply defected from the physical world back to their confinement.
Hi AndrewAD,
Yes some people like to define Sons of God in Genesis as fallen angels applying the book of Enoch for support. Just like people attributed knowledge, gift, and talents of man to these Greek gods, so too did the author of the Book of Enoch. This is a point I made earlier, this very thought proves the book of Enoch is not inspired word, for it is God who gives knowledge, gifts and talents to man, not rebel angels or Greek gods. The book of Enoch goes so far as to attribute named fallen angels with them each having and givng certain gifts, talents, and knowledge. Scripture tells us however that they COME from Him!! When man uses these God given talents for selfish gain and sins, God brings forth judgment upon him. Jesus was the only man who stayed pure, never a moment did he slip and give into the desires of his flesh and serve himself. He served only the will of God!
Well I am not sold on any view as to who the sons of God here are referring to. I don’t go with the Seth line theory and I am not even sure they are holy angels. The Book of Enoch actually calls them “The Watchers”. Who and what are these Watchers? I found these references in Wikipedia which have citations if you wish to follow their source:
Watcher occurs in both plural and singular forms in the Book of Daniel (4th–2nd century BC), where reference is made to their holiness. The apocryphal Books of Enoch (2nd–1st centuries BC) refer to both good and bad Watchers, with a primary focus on the rebellious ones.
In the Book of Daniel 4:13, 17, 23 (ESV)[4] there are three references to the class of “watcher, holy one” (watcher, Aramaic `iyr; holy one, Aramaic qaddiysh). The term is introduced by Nebuchadnezzar who says he saw “a watcher, a holy one come down (singular verb) from heaven.” He describes how in his dream the watcher says that Nebuchadnezzar will eat grass and be mad and that this punishment is “by the decree of the Watchers, the demand by the word of the Holy Ones” … “the living may know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men.” After hearing the king’s dream Daniel considers for an hour and then responds:
And because the king saw a watcher, a holy one, coming down from heaven and saying, ‘Chop down the tree and destroy it, but leave the stump of its roots in the earth, bound with a band of iron and bronze, in the tender grass of the field, and let him be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven periods of time pass over him,’ this is the interpretation, O king: It is a decree of the Most High, which has come upon my lord the king, that you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. You shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and you shall be wet with the dew of heaven, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, till you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.
The use of the term “Watchers” is common in the Book of Enoch. The Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 6–36) occurs in the Aramaic fragments with the phrase irin we-qadishin, “Watchers and Holy Ones”, a reference to Aramaic Daniel.[10] The Aramaic irin “watchers” is rendered as “angel” (Greek angelos, Coptic malah) in the Greek and Ethiopian translations, although the usual Aramaic term for angel malakha does not occur in Aramaic Enoch.
Unbeknown to many, some think that God created only angels and men as highly intelligent beings in his creation. But scripture talks about many kinds of angels, ranks, powers, principalities, and creatures. So is sons of God and can mean angels and men, then what other beings are called sons of God?
There were also many ages before ours and after ours. We are in but one snapshot of time, and cannot possibly sum up eternity or the age of creation with our own experiences and knowledge.
Ephesians 2:7
in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.Jude 1:25
to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.t8, you said, “…is sons of God and can mean angels and men, then what other beings are called sons of God?”
It is a fact that the reason for the mass debates and discussions and ‘alternative’ views concerning ‘Sons of God’ is caused by the absolute MISUNDERSTANDING about what that term means.
‘SONS’ or ‘Son’ in SPIRIT TERMS does not mean the same as in human terms – In this discussion this is the FIRST RULE OF UNDERSTANDING things of the spirit: Never confuse the two!!
Spirit creatures, even ALMIGHTY GOD, DO NOT PROCREATE: in this discussion this is the second rule to understanding things of the spirit.
What then is the meaning of ‘Son (of)’?
I am completely flumoxed as to WHY this question should EVER be raised among persons who class themselves as ‘knowledgeable’ in Christian (and Jewish) scriptural matters.
The scriptures is CLEAR that ‘Son(s)’ are ‘Those who do the will of God’: ‘All who follow the Holy Spirit [of God] are [Sons] of God’.
Jesus Christ claimed he was ‘Son of God’ after one of his many encounters with the Jews. The Jews were HORRIFIED that he should make such a claim and WRONGFULLY accused him of ‘MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD’ (according to the written scriptures – not ACTUALLY by the Jews. Note carefully that the Jews did not say it but it is written as an an ADDITION clause by the scripture writer/Translator …a trinitarian???).
Jesus responded saying that he DID NOT CALL HIMSELF GOD…. This statement seems at odds with ‘Equal TO God’… Does ‘Equal to’ mean the same as ‘IS’? Of course not. So then you will be told that the Jews have a claim that ‘The Son is EQUAL to the Father’… and therefore ‘Son of God’ means ‘HE IS GOD’?
Please respond to this so-called claim and WHERE ANYWHERE this is examples or claimed in any scriptures or in any type of reality. Please show HOW this ever could be true in ANY SENSE?
Of course the real reason did the claim is that TRINITARIANS can say that ‘Jesus is God’ and that ‘Jesus is EQUAL TO GOD’…. ‘Equal to AND is …’?
But, in fact, Jesus CORRECTED THEM saying, ‘Is it not written in the scriptures, and the scriptures cannot be broken, that ‘God himself called them ‘God’, those who received his word and YET I ONLY CALLED MYSELF ‘Son of God’.
Jesus went on to disclose the proper meaning of ‘Son’ saying that he was ‘DOING HIS (God’s) WORK’.
The TRUE SON is one who TRULY DOES the works of the Father.
The Son of God is he who does the works of God. On the human front, Jesus WAS (still is) the ONLY one who was ever a TRUE son of God. The MOST AMAZING REVELATION is that there is a resentment against the scripture that indefatigably states ‘Adam, Son of God’. WHY? ‘They’ fear to understand what it means…. Adam, indeed, was doing the works of God – until he fell to sin.
So, what of Angels? Angels, do they ‘Do the works of God’? Do they do what God purposes them to do? Holy Angels, Demon Angels… Yes/No?
Holy Angels are ‘SONS OF GOD’ because they ‘Do the works of God’…
Sons of …both in spirit terms and in human terms in respect of the Spirit, has NOTHING to do with ‘Offspring’ in the procreation sense. A TRUE son, even of a human ‘Father’, is someone who DOES (as near exactly) what that ‘Father’ shows him to do… This one NEED NOT BE his own PROCREATES child. Scriptures shows Onesimus was ‘Son’ to Paul… Onesimus became Paul’s Son even as Paul was in chains in prison. Did Paul procreate Onesimus?
Because trinitarians have always wrongfully taught that Jesus is the son of God – BY SOME INEXPLICABLY MEANS of being ‘Begotten’ by God (They refuse to also understand what ‘Begotten’ means) that was ETERNAL yet NOT ACTUAL… the indoctrination has blunted and stunted the minds of even major scholars, theologians, learned and wise men(?), as well as the mass majority of so-called ‘Believers’ of Christ and God.
Trinitarians have wrongfully preached a human relationship between God and Christ as if God PROCREATED HIS Christ. This has led to a confused set of beliefs that culminate into a sort of statement that makes no sense and cannot be explained by any kind of sense, logic, nor to any means of satisfaction – namely that Christ was NEVER NOT BORN yet is ALWAYS BEING BORN: ‘ETERNALLY BORN OF GOD’.
Of course many will disclaim THAT version and appeal to yet another equally nonsensical explanation which under any kind of examination results in attempts at another version. The hope being that the questioner will either tire of asking or of hearing impossible and feable-rooted mis-creations.
Scriptures tells us that Jesus is an HEIR to God… Try asking a trinitarian how Jesus is God if Jesus s only an heir. Then ask how scriptures tells us that there are those of mankind who will EQUALLY be HEIR TO GOD when they become BROTHERS TO CHRIST!!
We of the ordinary are not ‘Sons of God’ as Jesus is ‘Son of God’ but some are destined (and PRE-DESTINED) to be ‘Sons of God’… Therefore ‘Son of God’ cannot be a PROCREATION but a STATE OF BEING.
That STATE OF BEING is to be doing what GOD THE FATHER directs one to do… Not only so but to be doing what God the Father WANTS us to do… to do HOLY THINGS as he does.
However, It’s not for us sinful humans to do all that God wants us to do so the grace of God has allowed us to FOLLOW THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST – and in Christ there is allowance for the FAILURE of the TOTAL SONSHIP in us so those of the highest limited order can STILL be called ‘SONS OF GOD’.
Im still left to ponder (not really) why there is a claimed distinction between ‘SON’ of God and ‘SONS’ of God… Many trinitarians seem to think that the singular term demands that there CAN ONLY BE one such person… Yet they dismiss Adam in Luke 3:38 and give weak and unholy explanation that the term ‘Son’ is not used by the author yet it is absolutely clear that it is because the verses before are referring to the lineage of Jesus and each person mention is ‘SON OF’ the other mentioned by context. ‘…. Seth, of Adam. Adam, of God’ – (You do the Math!)
Help? I posted a reply to Andrew but I don’t see it. Has it been deleted?
Can you see it on the following page? Note: there is a load more link if the posts displayed are too recent.
https://heavennet.net/members/jael/
If you cannot see it, then I guess it is gone. Don’t know why. The site could have gone down the the moment you posted it. In such circumstances, you can retrieve the post if you hit the back button till you are back in the posting screen. At least in Chrome that likely would have worked.
Im still left to ponder (not really) why there is a claimed distinction between ‘SON’ of God and ‘SONS’ of God…
This is the distinction and it is not about a Trinity Doctrine as I know you already know.
The distinction is he is the prototype son. Firstborn. We who follow will be like him.
I guess you could say that the woman is like the man. The man was first. Likewise with Christ. He is the first.
The divine order of headship is: God > Christ > Man > Woman
While women are part of man (mankind) , some will be sons like Jesus.
I think it was you who said it elsewhere, that the definite article is the distinction, e.g., satan vs the Satan or god vs the God.
Likewise, sons vs the Son.
The Son of God is he who does the works of God
Agreed. Sons are led by the Spirit of God and thus being led, they will do God’s works. This has implications with the new birth or being born again or born from above. Of course, man is not the only creature who is or can be born of God. Angels for example are not procreated as they do not have parents and neither did they arrive through natural means that we know of.
For us. first is the natural birth through our natural parents, then is the new birth from God through Christ.
Paul said it in Romans 8:16–17:
“The Spirit himself bears witness with our Spirit that we are the children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.”Whoever is born of God is his offspring or son. But it is not beyond the ability of a son to fall. Fortunately for us, once our salvation is complete, we can never sin.
So, what of Angels? Angels, do they ‘Do the works of God’? Do they do what God purposes them to do? Holy Angels, Demon Angels… Yes/No?
Yes, but they can fall, and from thence they lose status as sons I suppose.
The other thing to consider is humans who become sons is not technically because they do the will of God, but that you must be born from above to do the will of God. You must be born of God. Angels, sons of God, Watchers are probably born of God from the outset as we are not told that they came into being through natural means first. Although I guess there is a lot of things we are not told.
When scripture talks about doing God’s will making you a son, that is in reference to those who do God’s will are chosen of him and are gifted access to his spirit. Without being led by the Spirit, the flesh will prompt you.
You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.
Thus it is by reason of God’s spirit that we become born of God and become his son. This is not bestowed on anyone, but those who do the will of God. We could then argue what came first, the spirit or doing the will of God. A bit like the chicken and the egg. Some would say that you cannot do the will of God without the Spirit, but does a man have the Spirit of God when he decides to accept God and his Spirit to begin with? Perhaps conviction of the Spirit which convicts all men is the first mover. From there, we have the Spirit who leads us.
After the Angels rebelled, it is perfectly reasonable that Yahweh should removed their freedom and access to knowledge of his current and future council – leading to these angels being ‘limited to the spirit world’ and thus unable to ‘directly’ influence any physical acts in the world, and, ‘limited to only their past knowledge of the council of Yahweh’.
Does this sound like an UNBOUNDED Spirit entity being ‘Bounded in everlasting [spiritual] chains and existing ‘in darkness’ (ignorance) of knowledge? A bird with its wings clipped; an phylosopher without access to current thinking: ‘chained in darkness’!
So the question that should be asked is, ‘Why are they called Demons and how do they possess a physical body’?
Well these questions are legit if we only read the Bible because this is what we are left wondering from what is revealed. But the Book of Enoch answers this, but of course it is questionable as to whether it is the correct answer by reason of the debate surrounding this books legitimacy.
The Book Enoch describes these sons of God as Watchers who we are to assume had authority to watch over man. But some of them lusted and imagined what would happen if they came down to them and interfered with man and showed off their knowledge and splendour. They would be like gods I guess they thought. Thus they crossed the line and even had offspring like men and it was their offspring, (not the Watchers themselves) that became the demons. In fact it says they even sinned against the animals which is not to say they had sex with animals, but that they mixed their seed (crossed species) and created vicious beasts that lusted after blood. These Watchers were chained or bound so that they could not interfere any longer and the flood eradicated their offspring and all other abominations from the face of the Earth. The Nephilim offspring thereby losing their bodies became spirits that roam the earth. And the parents the Watchers were chained so they could interfere no longer. Yes your version of chained Jael is worth considering.
We do read in scripture for example regarding angels that are bound:
Then the sixth angel sounded his trumpet, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar before God saying to the sixth angel with the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” So the four angels who had been prepared for this hour and day and month and year were released to kill a third of mankind.…
We also read about locusts being released from the bottomless pit who have an angel over them whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, but in Greek is Apollyon. Many believe this is another term for the Devil or The Satan. We do know that he will be put in the bottomless pit for 1000 years so as to not interfere with men during the Millennium. When you read such descriptions it does appear to be bound in chains or a prison so as to not interfere with mankind. You also get the idea that when they are released then watch out.
In the Book of Enoch we read that Azazel who was one of the chiefs taught mankind forbidden (occult) knowledge and corrupted mankind. The story pertaining to marrying women and creating offspring without any mention of Azazel is also told in the book of Genesis 6:2–4. And in modern English Bibles the word ‘azazel’ is actually mentioned, but in older English versions such as the King James, the word azazel is translated as “as a scapegoat”.
Leviticus 16:8–10
Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering for himself and shall make atonement for himself and for his house. Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the entrance of the tent of meeting. And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel. And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering, but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.In Christianity, Azazel has often been a symbol for Satan. The modern English Standard Version provides the footnote “16:8 saying the meaning of Azazel is uncertain; possibly the name of a place or a demon, traditionally a scapegoat… Most scholars accept the indication of some kind of demon or deity. Some of the early church fathers such as Origen identify Azazel with Satan. Who knows, the goat symbol for the Devil may originate from all this.
I think it was you who said it elsewhere, that the definite article is the distinction, e.g., satan vs the Satan or god vs the God.
Likewise, sons vs the Son.
t8, yes, I guess I hear too much false talk from trinitarians trying with futility to justify that Jesus is ‘THE SON’by virtue of being ‘Eternally Born …but not created’ added to their refusal to even acknowledge Luke 3:38 (The only EVER response I have received was to say that there was no ‘Son’ word mention in the verse…..!!! So then are they saying ‘Seth, of Adam’ was not saying, ‘Seth, SON of Adam’? Futile anti-truth of an obvious reality does nothing to stake a claim of a belief system. In one belief system people are reincarnated as insects… How many insect ‘people’ then are killed, anhilialated, destroyed (!!), wounded…by their own human people? Or that a cows or monkeys or even rats is are ‘Gods’… Sense? Absolutely codswallop – but I don’t discuss beliefs system other than Christianity as it is pointless and futile (sorry… Make that ‘purposeless’)
Yes, I agree that ‘THE Son’ is the prototype of those to come… But I’m only quoting scriptures anyway. It’s not something I claim to have discovered of myself. My contention is that ‘Sons’ and ‘Son’ are both defined IN the SAME way: ‘Doing the works of the Father’.
Therefore, there is no distinction as far the ACTS of THE SON and the ACTS of the SONS at the base level.
At a higher level we can distinguish those who do the will of the Father by virtue of their own desire, their own will – namely, Adam before he sinned; Jesus, in continuation; other holy ones of mankind but sinful in some way: Abraham, …Samson, especially David, even Solomon, the prophets and even the disciples and apostles.
And then those there are the angels whose only Will is to do God’s Will: They have free-will but they also know that exercising that free-will against God is not favourable to them.
I hear arguments about ‘Free-Will’ concerning Angels. When the Angels visited Lot in Sodom, did they not exercise ‘Free-Will’ in allowing Lot to leave without his ‘Son-in-Laws’ … and allow Lor to go up into the mountain instead of the town? What was the result? The daughters had ‘no man’ to breed from so they ‘raped'(?) their own Father!!! Should the Angels have forced the Will of God on Lot to bring his son-in-laws and/or to go to the town where there were men-folk? And, of course, Balaam, and others!! Were those angels given STRICT instructions that they followed to the letter / or did they exercise free-will that led to an acceptable outcome based on the premises set by God?
And then those there are the angels whose only Will is to do God’s Will: They have free-will but they also know that exercising that free-will against God is not favourable to them.
As well as not wanting to anyway. God is love and they are in love with God. But some decided to love something else more than God.
As for free will. I heard it once as being like a child who asks his parent if he can go to the playground. The answer is yes, so when he is there, he then asks can I have a go on the swing. Then asks can I go on the slide. The Parent then says, I let you go to the park, now that you are here, do what you want.
I’ve posted this video for me to watch later. It could be a load of trash for all I know.
But I am willing to hear anyone out and give them a chance to explain their view.
Feel free to comment if you watch it too.Well that video was very good. Better than I could have hoped for. It puts the final nail into the coffin of the Sethite View.
Hi t8,
I’ve only watched the very beginning of the video and just from that I am confused by why you think it’s good?
What we know is that Enoch and Noah followed God, who cares if they were descendants of Seth? What we know is Abraham followed God and Caanan followed idolatry, who cares they were both descendants of Noah?
Yes a righteous person can have offspring where some are good while others are evil. Even within my own two children I can recognize between the two that one tends to be more mischievous than the other.
What we know is that in Genesis 24 Abraham on his death bed did not want his servant to find for his son Isaac a Caananite daughter for a wife because Abraham feared his son would turn to idolatry.
What we know is that Israel was not suppose to intermarry for the same reason and this was a problem for them of which brought cursing, luckily nothing as bad as a massive flood!! I guess it’s not actually luck, but a promise God made to mankind.
What we know is that the title Sons of God represents righteousness and could not be attributed to anything that represents already fallen.
What we know is that humans are called children of God and Sons of God. We also know that marrying the wrong person can bring you down the wrong path, and that man’s enmitity is his carnal nature of which includes a weak lustful flesh. The daughters in Genesis 6 were indeed beautiful!!!!!!!!
Where in the OT do we have one example of a rebellious spirit being messenger? Please give me a scripture!
Hi Jodi,
From what I just read of that which you write, I think you are a little confused or have been misled.
The definition of ‘Son(s) of God’ is ‘One (Those) or follow the Holy Spirit’, ‘… Who do the works of God’.
It is ok to substitute ‘Father’ for ‘God’ in the above definition as required.
The holy angels ARE ‘Sons of God’.
When they fell they were removed from the Sonship.
They are now called ‘Demons’ (from ‘Demonic’) to reflect their destructive behaviour and influence in the physical world.
No one says or is saying or should say that Demons are Sons of God except in extension:’Fallen Son of God’.
Jesus called the many of the Jews ‘Sons of Satan’ – why was that? What does the scriptures say about that?
Satan is a Spirit entity, yet Jesus called these flesh and blood Humans, ‘Sons’ of a fallen spirit entity.
Yet we know that Humans can be forgiven from their bad ways and wronful thinking – Why? Because they are GREATER Sons of God than Angels. Greater, in that Humans are made ‘In the Image of God’, whereas Angels are not.
Fallen Angels CANNOT be forgiven and must remain fallen until their DESTRUCTION at an appointed time by God.
Until that appointed time they remain in metaphorical Chains in Spiritual Darkness, serving as deterents to others who might think of rebelling.
I’ve only watched the very beginning of the video and just from that I am confused by why you think it’s good?
You really expect me to answer this question with a straight face?
Hi Jodi,
From what I just read of that which you write, I think you are a little confused or have been misled.
The definition of ‘Son(s) of God’ is ‘One (Those) or follow the Holy Spirit’, ‘… Who do the works of God’.
It is ok to substitute ‘Father’ for ‘God’ in the above definition as required.
The holy angels ARE ‘Sons of God’.
When they fell they were removed from the Sonship.
Agreed. +1.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
