Nephilim

Participant

Genisis 3:6-7

6And the woman seeth that the tree [is] good for food, and that it [is] pleasant to the eyes, and the tree is desirable to make [one] wise, and she taketh of its fruit and eateth, and giveth also to her husband with her, and he doth eat;

7and the eyes of them both are opened, and they know that they [are] naked, and they sew fig-leaves, and make to themselves girdles

Because it looked like a yummy apple!

And then for reasons totally unrelated they noticed they were naked.

My sunday school teacher taught me that and I'm sticking to it.

August 3, 2006 at 7:50 am#23465

Participant

I noticed people brought up the question of how the giants would have survived the flood.

Well the answers would all only lie in speculation. Unless, a clue is hidden in scripture I am unaware of.

I would like to know if some people here actually think that if scripture doesnt tell us about something then it couldnt have happened.

What I mean is I believe scripture says angels came down to the daughters of men and together they bred giants / Nephilim / Rephraim / Hybrids.

I also believe that scripture also says that they were around after the flood.

Genisis 6:4
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

Notice it says, “and also afterward”. After what? Well, maybe the flood!!! That would make sense considering that Goliath and his crew are descended from the giants. ding ding ding

How did this happen? Once again, scripture appears to be silent. But, does that mean it isnt so? Absolutely not!

Possible scenarios all 100% based on speculation.

1. The Flood wasn't global. The word “earth” can be translated as “land”.

2. Somebody on the ark was a carrier for the genetic hybrid gene. One of the eight?

3. The angels came back for a visit a second time.

4. A remenant survived, somehow, using supernatural strength, or supernatural powers and the verses that are discussing the 8 who survived are not contradicting that giants survived but simply not discussing them since they aren't human and those verses are discussing humans.

5. The disembodied demons have powers we don't understand and some managed to possess and assimulate new hosts and refuse spirit and body. (yeah, this one is out there)

It is all speculation, but just because we don't have all the pieces of the puzzle doesn't mean we can't see the picture beneath.

August 3, 2006 at 1:14 pm#23477

Participant

Quote (Mercy @ Aug. 03 2006,06:49)

Kenrch,

With all the love in the world you really just don't know the truth on this. Angels came into the daughters of men, Jesus knew it, the apostles knew they all taught it.

Gen. chapter 6 is describing this event.

Jesus is telling us that in heaven we will be like the angels. (who are in heaven and obey God, not like the angels who aren't in heaven because the are fallen and don't obey God)

Jude v.6-7

6And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Notice how he says “in a similar way”? He is describing that the sinful activities in Sodom and Gomorrah were like the angels sins. In other words, sexual.

Who do you think Goliath was? He was a Nephilim. Why is it that God didn't want his people to mingle with the canaanites? Why was it that God had them kill them all man, woman and child? Because they weren't just sinful people. They were evil satanic hybrids that God justly and mercifully destroyed. If the world knew this they would not think so poorly of our Heavenly Father. I am pained to hear people say, “How can a good God do that?” or “I could never serve a God that kills children”. Don't let this slip by you without thought.

Jude actually quotes from Enoch. If you seriously would read the book I don't think you could deny that the writers of the new testament believed what it was saying.

I am very passionate about this subject because I think it is part of the deception that ushers in the antichrist.

Revelation 9:1
1The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. The star was given the key to the shaft of the Abyss. 2When he opened the Abyss, smoke rose from it like the smoke from a gigantic furnace. The sun and sky were darkened by the smoke from the Abyss.

Revelation 9:11
11They had as king over them the angel of the Abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek, Apollyon.

Here Abaddon is released from the abyss as the King of the bottomless pit. Who is this guy? Lets see…

Revelation 17:8
8The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and will come up out of the Abyss and go to his destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because he once was, now is not, and yet will come.

Notice how it says the beast comes out of the Abyss? Most bible teachers never make the connection between the beast and Abaddon. I don't know why i suppose because they think that the man of sin has to be an actual human. Yet, in scriptures angels always appear as men. Don't let popular culture blur this with their inaccurate angelic depictions.

Hebrews 13:2
2Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it.

Acts 1:10
10And as they were gazing intently into the sky while He was going, behold, two men in white clothing stood beside them.

Notice also that it says the Beast was, now is not, and yet will come. When was he? Before the flood when the sons of God came into the daughters of men. Where is he now? In the Abyss? Where will he come from? Back out of the Abyss.

Well in the book of Enoch it talks about a Fallen Angel named Azazel who taught man terrible things including how to make war. He was the leader of the fallen angels, a King! Sounds like the beast's activities in Revelation does it not? It all says in Enoch to ascribe to Azazel ALL SIN, for the things he had taught man. The antichrist is called the man of sin, the wicked one, the son of perdition. Sound familar?

Is Azazel in the bible? Yes

Leviticus 16:8
8″Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats, one lot for the LORD and the other lot for the scapegoat.

The word scapegoat is actually a proper name, Azazel. The talmud describes this ritual as the priests offering one of the goats to the spirit Azazel by leading it to pit outside of Jerusalem and throwing it in. In Enoch Azazel is bound in the abyss, the bottomless pit.

2nd Opinions 5:7
7For there are (N)three that testify:

8the Old Testament and the New Testament and the Book of Enoch; and the three are in agreement.

The truth is out there my friend.

Believe the book which isn't a book of enoch. There is no book of Eboch in the bible. Who knows where the “book” of Enoch came from.

Scripture doesn't say a word about angels having sex with women. I was like you caught up in a fairy tale not a scriptural writing. Living in the SiFi end time of lies and would be lies. Jesus said Thy Word is TRUE. If you perfer to believe something else but the true word of God that's your preference.

One day we will all know the truth.

Gen 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enosh. Then began men to call upon the name of Jehovah.
Luk 3:38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

“Jesus the Son of God a descedants of Seth”. If the Son of God a descedant of Seth then Seth and his descedants were sons of God the same sons that went into the daughters of men the descedants of Cain. A mix of good and evil.

2Co 6:15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what portion hath a believer with an unbeliever?

1Co 15:33 Be not deceived: Evil companionships corrupt good morals.

Gen 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.

The sons of God were men, human men descedants of Seth. Seth the replacement of righteous Able.
The daughters of men being the decendents of Cain the murderer of Able. There is no mention of angelic beings having sex with humans. God said He was going to destroy all flesh. No hybirds, no half and halfs, and no monsters as stated in Enoch. But just mighty MEN.
Gen 6:5 And Jehovah 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.
Gen 6:6 And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
Gen 6:7 And Jehovah said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the ground; both man, and beast, and creeping things, and birds of the heavens; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Gen 6:17 And I, behold, I do bring the flood of waters upon this earth, to “destroy all flesh”, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is in the earth shall die.

ALL FLESH were destroyed but Noah and family.

Gen 6:9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations: Noah walked with God.

1Pe 3:20 that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:
Gen 6:9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations: Noah walked with God.

August 3, 2006 at 1:24 pm#23478

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2006,05:35)

Hi kenrch,
Your continued love of judging does not reflect well on you and is very boring.

I'm not judging I'm defending God from a bad teaching about Him. Remember “This teaching makes my God a murderer and IDON”T LIKE IT”. You won't take a stand on your own teaching. SAD

August 3, 2006 at 4:38 pm#23490

Participant

The book of Enoch was in the bible for at least 500 years before the councils of Rome. They took it out. I do not believe that Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James and Jude quoted, referenced, confirmed and taught from Enoch in a secular sense. They taught from it because it contained inspired writ. Either it contains inspired word or they borrowed from it to “create” Christianity. Enoch was found in the dead sea scrolls! It is older than the new testament.

You and I both believe that God can and does preserve his word. But we differ on the medium of which that has been performed.

Show me chapter and verse that says anything that would lead you to the conclusion that every inspired scripture would be placed in one codex and neatly bound.

Personal Opinions 119:105
105 Your word is a lamp to my feet
and a light for my path and conviently bound in a leather codex by the council of Rome and finally filtered by the later reformation.

There are several canons that exist in the world. The ethiopic canon includes the book of Enoch. The catholic canon includes apocrypha. The original King James version of 1611 had the apocrypha in it.

If you are right and the current accepted canon for protestants is the only words or message from God then you have to believe that it took men about 1800 years to form the canon.

Here is what I think you must believe. Just as God supernaturally inspired the writers of scripture you must believe that he supernaturally guided the men who voted at councils. Is this what you think? If so what is this faith based on? Is it scripture? Or is it a faith based on how you personally think God operates? Are you determing history by how “you” think our God would have chose to do something? God is not bound by what we think he should or should not do.

The men who formed the canon are the very same untrustworthy bunch who formed the trinity doctrine. Why are you assuming they would work diligently at forming the canon in any other manner that what is consistent with their character. Which is to veil truth.

The bottom line is, yes, I agree with you that God's hand was in protecting his message so that truth would last through the ages. The message of reconciliation through Christ has reached the world. I am not placing doubt on the canon of our Bible not containing inspired scripture. I am asking what is the source, the very core of your belief that no other holy write exists on this planet?

What scriptural foundation in clear and concise words tells you that beyond doubt the western protestant canon is the only inspired writ? Without this clearly explained then is this a foundational belief built on a tradition of man?

August 3, 2006 at 4:43 pm#23491

Participant

Oh by the way we don't have to interperet end time scenarios the same. But please don't accuse me a believing sci-fi fantasies.

Do you believe Jesus is coming back?

That event will make all sci-fi stuff look like a boring avon presentation.

It is the blessed hope of the faith and without it christians are fooling themselves. Without this “sci-fi” event the dead will never be raised.

Why do you think that the enoch teaching makes God a murderer? I am very confused?

August 3, 2006 at 7:32 pm#23516

Participant

Quote (Mercy @ Aug. 03 2006,17:38)

You and I both believe that God can and does preserve his word. But we differ on the medium of which that has been performed.

Show me chapter and verse that says anything that would lead you to the conclusion that every inspired scripture would be placed in one codex and neatly bound.

Personal Opinions 119:105
105 Your word is a lamp to my feet
and a light for my path and conviently bound in a leather codex by the council of Rome and finally filtered by the later reformation.

If you are right and the current accepted canon for protestants is the only words or message from God then you have to believe that it took men about 1800 years to form the canon.

There is no “book of Enoch mentioned if it is please give scripture and I will be more than happy to admit I'm wrong.

Ok so God wrote a letter to his children then allowed men to corrupt the latter that He wanted His children to know. So He has now allowed us the knowledge of the “book” of Enoch. That goes against the scripture he has given us in His real letter.

We will see

August 3, 2006 at 7:35 pm#23517

Participant

Quote (Mercy @ Aug. 03 2006,17:43)

Oh by the way we don't have to interperet end time scenarios the same. But please don't accuse me a believing sci-fi fantasies.

Do you believe Jesus is coming back?

That event will make all sci-fi stuff look like a boring avon presentation.

It is the blessed hope of the faith and without it christians are fooling themselves. Without this “sci-fi” event the dead will never be raised.

Why do you think that the enoch teaching makes God a murderer? I am very confused?

Mercy,

I think that Nick's teaching that God will forbid salvation because the person is unable to get to water is making God a murderrer.

August 3, 2006 at 7:52 pm#23520

Participant

Jude v.14

14Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones 15to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”

You are right that it does not say “the book of Enoch” it simply states Enoch prophesied.

Jude v. 4

4For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

Where was this condemnation written about?

Enoch 1:9

9
And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones
To execute judgement upon all,
And to destroy all the ungodly:
And to convict all flesh
Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed,
And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

No matter how you slice Jude quotes this book. What are you basing your belief on?

I am basing it on the affirmations found in the very same bible you have. This affirmation is then confirmed by actual history.

I do want you to know that I admire your stance to protect God's word from false teachings. I also know that our salvation is not dependent at all on agreeing about this. I also don't want you to think I believe that you have to agree with me. Because I don't think that.

It boils down to me believing that this world is wrapped in darkness by spiritual forces. I believe that these spiritual forces will do anything to keep man from understanding the full impact of their dark activities. I believe that honest scrutiny of scripture confirms what Enoch teaches and agrees with it. These spiritual forces are active and want these truths to remain hidden.

It will do neither one of us any good for me to keep “trying to convince you” so I will stop. But I would suggest to you to read Enoch and compare it to what your bible says and then realize that it predates the new testament. Some say that they won't touch another book so that they won't be led astray. I believe we are to test the spirits and you can't test something that you won't at least consider.

I will leave off with this:

II Timothy 2:23
23Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

So I won't argue you with ya about it. Instead I will build you up by admiring your commitement to the revelation you have in the canon you hold.

And

I John 4:7-8
7Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

I love you in Christ

August 3, 2006 at 8:08 pm#23525

Participant

Quote (Mercy @ Aug. 03 2006,20:52)

Jude v.14

You are right that it does not say “the book of Enoch” it simply states Enoch prophesied.

Jude v. 4

Where was this condemnation written about?

Enoch 1:9

No matter how you slice Jude quotes this book. What are you basing your belief on?

I am basing it on the affirmations found in the very same bible you have. This affirmation is then confirmed by actual history.

I will leave off with this:

II Timothy 2:23
23Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

So I won't argue you with ya about it. Instead I will build you up by admiring your commitement to the revelation you have in the canon you hold.

And

I John 4:7-8
7Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

I love you in Christ

OH Mercy,

This thing with the angels and daughters of men have nothing to do with salvation neither are you attacking God. So really it's something to do. I love the truth so I look for it in everything. whaen it comes to something like the Nephiliums or renowned men it mostly fun as I said we will find out if not now then latter

Bless you

August 3, 2006 at 11:12 pm#23557

Participant

Quote (Mercy @ Aug. 03 2006,08:20)

Genisis 3:6-7

7and the eyes of them both are opened, and they know that they [are] naked, and they sew fig-leaves, and make to themselves girdles

Because it looked like a yummy apple!

And then for reasons totally unrelated they noticed they were naked.

My sunday school teacher taught me that and I'm sticking to it.

If eating apples caused them to realize they were naked it might be a good time to pass the apples around again – judging by the amount of nakedness that is shoved in our faces daily (billboards – advertising…)

August 3, 2006 at 11:39 pm#23561

Participant

Quote (Mercy @ Aug. 03 2006,20:52)

Jude v.14

You are right that it does not say “the book of Enoch” it simply states Enoch prophesied.

Jude v. 4

Where was this condemnation written about?

Enoch 1:9

No matter how you slice Jude quotes this book. What are you basing your belief on?

I am basing it on the affirmations found in the very same bible you have. This affirmation is then confirmed by actual history.

I will leave off with this:

II Timothy 2:23
23Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

So I won't argue you with ya about it. Instead I will build you up by admiring your commitement to the revelation you have in the canon you hold.

And

I John 4:7-8
7Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

I love you in Christ

True a saying found in the book of Enoch is referred to by Jude.
The question remains – does this make the 'book of Enoch' a reliable source?
Paul warned us not to be soon shaken (like a reed by every wind of doctrine) as to the day of the Lord being at hand – he said though it be presented as a letter supposedly from us.

This is not to say that the book of Enoch is bogus, I am just saying its status is unknown – as is the apochrypha and other writings.
Now while its contents would seem to hold some answers to questions long wondered at, they also serve to pose just as many.
This in itself does not disqualify them by any means – or all scripture (which has been wrestled with for centuries) would also be questionable.

One measure we can use is its usefulness relative to the message of salvation – which is very important to us as mortal beings found in a condition of sin.

The fact of being mentioned in scripture in passing is not sufficient in my view to give it the status of scripture.
For one we have no gaurantee that the book of Enoch is a faithful transcription of the original prophesies of Enoch – Jude may well have been writing by direct divine inspiration – which happened to coincide with a verse in this book.

Paul also mentioned certain of the Greek poets (philosophers?) in Acts. (Acts 17:28) Does that mean we take everything else they said to be authoratative?

Balaam was 100% reliable in as much as his prophecy concerning Israel was concerned – yet he went on to teach them error and to rebel against God – so I just think we have to be careful.

JMTCW

August 4, 2006 at 6:24 am#23593

Participant

malcolm ferris,

I agree 100%.

I will never teach from Enoch in a manner that relates it as equal to our received canon. It is the message as a whole that I am refferring to. Simply stated: Angels came down into the daughters of men and they bore giants.

It is a confirmation, I won't teach from a pulpit and quote Enoch as scripture. Instead, I would reference it as a secondary source as would a minister reference the work of say Calvin or Luther. (This is hypothetical since I am not a minister)

On a personal level both acedemically and spiritually I believe the message in Enoch to be truth. I am not saying that every word is true nor that it is without corruption. I am saying that manuscript evidence, scriptural corralation and the prompting of the hidden man in my heart all agree that the events recorded in Enoch are historical and literal to the degree that fallen angels are literal, real beings who have been maliciously hard at work trying to bring man to destruction. I think they work just as hard at hiding this from us.

August 4, 2006 at 1:12 pm#23605

Participant

Hi Mercy

One thing that seems to contradict this would be Jesus' words in Matt 22:30 which suggest that angels are not involved in marraige arrangements. Now it is pretty clear what the purpose of the marraige covenant is, namely to have a family through the union of a husband and a wife.

Also I have seen mention on this board (not sure which thread) of the idea that angels do not have any sex organs, another hurdle in the realisation of this idea.
I think the historian Josephus claimed that the fallen angels 'pressed themselves into flesh' – how is this possible? Did they create for themselves bodies to inhabit on earth? I thought God alone is the creator…
Or did they take bodies that were already there and use them? If so what bodies? a sub-human species?

Blessings

August 4, 2006 at 6:43 pm#23613

Participant

To me this supposed contradiction isn't really one at all.

Angels don't marry in heaven. Which ones? The good ones. Does anyone really think Jesus is also comparing us to being like the fallen angels. Absolutely Not! He is comparing us to the angels who do the will of God.

It could be said Angels don't try to overthrow the throne of God. Which ones? The good ones. It is obvious that the “bad” angels don't do the will of God. Jesus would not be comparing us to bad angels at all.

We will be like the angels in heaven after Christ returns. At that time all the angels who did the naughty stuff had been thrown into the lake of fire. So those angels wouldnt be around for us to even be compared to.

Jesus simply is not comparing us to fallen angels he is comparing us to the good angels. The mere fact that he brings up the angels as an example gives the implication to me that:

right now we do the things of this world. Like the angels who have fallen.

but after the resurrection we do the things of that world. Like the angels who are in heaven.

About the angels having bodies. Scriptures are very clear that when angels come to earth they have bodies. They even eat food. They always appear as Men while on earth.

Why do people think angels don't have power themselves to do miraculous things? I don't know how God distributes this power, but the scripture is very clear that angels are extremely powerful beings!!!

If angels only had power when God decides they should have it, then we would have to assume that all of Satan's activities are directly aided by God.

August 5, 2006 at 10:39 am#23672

Participant

Hi Mercy

You make some good points, However I remain sceptical.

For one thing Satan or any of his messengers (fallen angels, demons etc) can have no power unless it is given them of God, and this is only done to fulfil His will and purpose.

In 2 Thess 2:7 we find that God is allowing this mystery of iniquity to continue – as a mystery – until the time He determines.

Micaiah the prophet in the OT had a vision in which God posed this question to those in His presence 'who will go down and do my bidding on the earth' to which a demon from the underworld replied 'let me go and I will be a lying spirit in the mouths of the King's prophets'.

There are many other examples in the scriptures to show that, although Satan and his angels may have power, they are yet at the command of God, they even fear God and worship before Him (James 2:19).

The book of Job shows us that although the Devil may have a haughty attitude when conversing with God, he is yet at the mercy of His will, being forbidden to take Job's life.

Also I see this principle at work throughout. God alone is the creator and capable of original creative acts, Satan or anyone else is not able to do this, at best all the enemy can do is to take something God has created and pervert it.

To hybridize a creature is the best that he (Lucifier) can hope for. We are also told in Genesis that the serpent had a seed, no mention is made of any other seed relative to man.

The serpent was a creature – beast of the field – a creature of the earth like the man formed from the earth. He was one of the main characters in the story of the fall of mankind, man fell in Eden not afterwards in my opinion.

Also I beleive that the man that was made in God's image and likeness was not a creature of the earth but rather as God is a spirit, was a spirit man. Which was then given a body of earth to inhabit.

A spiritual being, as I understand it does not partake of sexual activities, only creatures do that.

Anyway TJMTCW

August 5, 2006 at 6:42 pm#23683