Did Fallen Angels Have Sex with Earthly Women?

[Watchman_2]

Sorry, I am not wrong. The Tree of Life may represent Christ in a way, but it was a TREE! God was speaking with the Son.

Ever hear of a metaphor??

What theory? World ages?

You may consider your questions funny; however, it is just another example of your Bible illiteracy. See 2 Pet. 3.

God loves to talk to His Son. Don't you?

Yeah, but you are the one claiming 'three in one'. There would be no reason for God to speak to Himself.

 

[Alabaster]

If you take the time to examine that language in the manuscripts, you would see that there is nothing therein the language which locks in the meaning that you allege.

The KJV rendering with Strong's Concordance numbering -

Gen 3:22 And the LORDH3068 GodH430 said,H559 Behold,H2005 the manH120 is becomeH1961 as oneH259 ofH4480 us, to knowH3045 goodH2896 and evil:H7451 and now,H6258 lestH6435 he put forthH7971 his hand,H3027 and takeH3947 alsoH1571 of the treeH4480 H6086 of life,H2416 and eat,H398 and liveH2425 for ever:H5769
​

The English rendered word 'forth', 'hand', and 'take' in Strong's -

H7971
שׁלח
shâlach
shaw-lakh'
A primitive root; to send away, for, or out (in a great variety of applications): - X any wise, appoint, bring (on the way), cast (away, out), conduct, X earnestly, forsake, give (up), grow long, lay, leave, let depart (down, go, loose), push away, put (away, forth, in, out), reach forth, send (away, forth, out), set, shoot (forth, out), sow, spread, stretch forth (out).

H3027
יד
yâd
yawd
A primitive word; a hand (the open one (indicating power, means, direction, etc.), in distinction from H3709, the closed one); used (as noun, adverb, etc.) in a great variety of applications, both literally and figuratively, both proximate and remote: - (+ be) able, X about, + armholes, at, axletree, because of, beside, border, X bounty, + broad, [broken-] handed, X by, charge, coast, + consecrate, + creditor, custody, debt, dominion, X enough, + fellowship, force, X from, hand [-staves, -y work], X he, himself, X in, labour, + large, ledge, [left-] handed, means, X mine, ministry, near, X of, X order, ordinance, X our, parts, pain, power, X presumptuously, service, side, sore, state, stay, draw with strength, stroke, + swear, terror, X thee, X by them, X them-selves, X thine own, X thou, through, X throwing, + thumb, times, X to, X under, X us, X wait on, [way-] side, where, + wide, X with (him, me, you), work, + yield, X your-selves.

H3947
לקח
lâqach
law-kakh'
A primitive root; to take (in the widest variety of applications): - accept, bring, buy, carry away, drawn, fetch, get, infold, X many, mingle, place, receive (-ing), reserve, seize, send for, take (away, -ing, up), use, win.

​

There is nothing in the manuscripts which locks the literal interpretation that you allege is true.

1 Timothy 6:4 NLT
Anyone who teaches something different is arrogant and lacks understanding. Such a person has an unhealthy desire to quibble over the meaning of words. This stirs up arguments ending in jealousy, division, slander, and evil suspicions.

 

[Alabaster]

Ever hear of a metaphor??

I was just wondering if you have.

You may consider your questions funny; however, it is just another example of your Bible illiteracy. See 2 Pet. 3.

Care to answer the questions? What theory? What world ages?

Yeah, but you are the one claiming 'three in one'. There would be no reason for God to speak to Himself.

He does it incessantly.

 

[Watchman_2]

Hilarious! Suspended, now?

If you've ever planned a garden, you'd know that some beautifully designed gardens have a prominent specimen that is central. Your poor ability to interpret the Scriptures is fairly alarming--and dangerous to the spiritually gullible.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
​

So, according to you, this magical apple tree, without roots in the ground, not only has the ability to suspend itself, but can also float and transmit itself in time and distance to New Jerusalem.

I dare say that it is all of you, who believe in magic trees, are the spiritually gullible.

 

[Alabaster]

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
​

So, according to you, this magical apple tree, without roots in the ground, not only have the ability to suspend itself in time, but can also float and transmit itself to New Jerusalem.

I dare say that it is all of you, who believe in magic trees, are the spiritually gullible.

What magic apple tree?

The Tree of Life is a component of Heaven.

You need to get another hobby.

 

[Watchman_2]

1 Timothy 6:4 NLT
Anyone who teaches something different is arrogant and lacks understanding. Such a person has an unhealthy desire to quibble over the meaning of words. This stirs up arguments ending in jealousy, division, slander, and evil suspicions.

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

 

[Watchman_2]

I was just wondering if you have.

If you ever did any homework, you would not have to ask.

Hos 14:8 Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols? I have heard him, and observed him: I am like a green fir tree. From me is thy fruit found.
​

God refers to Himself as a fir 'tree'.

Care to answer the questions? What theory? What world ages?

Go to the End Times forum under the 'Endtime Church' topic. I covered most of it there.

He does it incessantly.

Proof??

 

[Watchman_2]

What magic apple tree?

The Tree of Life is a component of Heaven.

You need to get another hobby.

Enjoy your trip through life! Some people prefer to live a life of knowledge and understanding. Others, like you, choose to live it in ignorance.

 

[tim-from-pa]

..... said the pot to the kettle.

 

[Alabaster]

[/B]

If you ever did any homework, you would not have to ask.

Hos 14:8 Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols? I have heard him, and observed him: I am like a green fir tree. From me is thy fruit found.
​

God refers to Himself as a fir 'tree'.

So?

Go to the End Times forum under the 'Endtime Church' topic. I covered most of it there.

That topic is dead, and rightly so.

Proof??

Fathers and sons who love each other communicate.

Do you not pray? Your prayers are heard and your requests are communicated to God through your mediator, the Son.

Jesus is constantly in communication with the Father.

 

[Watchman_2]

..... said the pot to the kettle.

Proof??

 

[Alabaster]

..... said the pot to the kettle.

 

[Watchman_2]

So?

That topic is dead, and rightly so.

Fathers and sons who love each other communicate.

Do you not pray? Your prayers are heard and your requests are communicated to God through your mediator, the Son.

Jesus is constantly in communication with the Father.

I already wished you well on your trip. To address you thereafter would be sinful.

 

[stovebolts]

In Gen. 1:20, 21, & 24, the English translation of only the manuscript words reads as -

Gen 1:20 God said waters abundantly creature . .

Gen 1:21 God created great whales every living creature . . .

Gen 1:24 God said earth bring living creature . . .
​

The rest of the wording in the KJV was added by the translators [either rightfully or in error].

If you look at Gen. 1:26 in the manuscripts and take the KJV English equivalent on only the manuscript words, you have -

Gen 1:26 God said make man image likeness dominion fish sea fowl air cattle all earth every thing creepeth earth
​

The rest of the wording, as seen in the KJV, is filled in by the translators. So, it seems to me that your best argument against my post would have been that the words 'us' and 'our' are not in the manuscripts and were improperly inserted into the text by the translators.

***********

Hello, let us first address what you've posted. The Original Hebrew states it as such.
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ־לֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל הָאָרֶץ וּבְכָל הָרֶמֶשׂ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל הָאָרֶץ:

As you can see, there are 19 Hebrew words, yet in your literal translation, you only have 18. The King James renders the verse with the use of 50 English words and adds punctuation while the Jews also render this verse by way of 50 English words while adding punctuation.

I also noticed that you use Strongs to define your words. Let it be known that Strongs is a biblically based, biased source which only tells you how a particular word has been translated in the Bible. It is not a "dictionary", nor is it remotely close to a lexicon, thus, when used to describe the meaning behind a word, it falls terribly, terribly short as it is based primarily on biblical interpretation. Simply put, Strongs is a fantastic aid, but it makes a lousy literal translation as even YLT uses 48 words.

Now then, I will not profess to know the Hebrew language and as such, I rely on those who do, as to accurately translate the language, into something that I can wrap my mind around. Ironically the Jews themselves render the text into English almost exactly the way the KJV renders it. Thus, I am satisfied that the KJV is as close to relaying the meaning of the original text that can be attained via translation.

Simply put, using Strongs to create a literal translation falls short... Very short.

Now then, let me ask you a question on the English Translation we render as GOD in Genesis 1. Tell me now, what is it's meaning in it's original language. Actually, where did this word first originate from? Is it even a Hebrew word at all? If not, what culture do we have that records this word, and in what sense are they using it?

If you do this work, you will find that the word used for GOD in Genesis 1 is plural. You should also find out why it is plural.

I await your reply.

Grace and Peace.

 

[stovebolts]

I just finished reading this page.
I would ask that we refrain from the personal attacks, follow the tos and continue with our discussion.

Grace and Peace.

 

[theLords]

You demonstrate your Bible illiteracy with that comment.

Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
​

As one can plainly see, the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil did not grow out of the ground. So, unless you know of some apple, or other fruit, tree that suspends itself in the air without roots in the ground, one can only conclude that those two trees were entities -- not fruit trees.

If you did your homework on the word 'eat' in the manuscripts, you would have discovered that nothing therein the meaning locks it into the definition you allege in the quote above -

H398
אכל
'âkal
aw-kal'
A primitive root; to eat (literally or figuratively): - X at all, burn up, consume, devour (-er, up), dine, eat (-er, up), feed (with), food, X freely, X in . . . wise (-deed, plenty), (lay) meat, X quite.
​

For those of like mind as you, consideration should be given to the means of salvation in this flesh dispensation of time. Since you, defacto, argue that the tree of life was a magical floating apple or other fruit tree [how silly is that] and that everlasting life could be obtained by biting into a magical apple or other fruit [more silliness], then you are saying that there was a means for salvation other than Christ. Of course, such belief makes Christ a liar -- see John 14:6.

In other words, there would have had to be a change in plan by God from the eating of a magical apple for salvation to having His Son slain for salvation in order to support your theory. Scripture, not only does not state a change in God's plan after they sinned in the Gardern, but, actually informs us when the plan to have the Son slain was hatched -

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
​

Prior to the 6 days of creation in Gen. 1, it was already God's plan to have the Son slain as the means for salvation.

Accordingly, there was never a plan for magic-apple salvation. Therefore, your magic-apple-salvation tree theory never meets the burden of proof and reproof required thereof it to be considered by a true Bible believer to be meritorious.

A Bible "lesson" from a Christian Identity cultist! Hmmm, I wonder what I shall do with this information that the Bible says Adam and Eve ate the Son...

Did your literal indwelling angel help you with this theory?

 

[Prince]

A Bible "lesson" from a Christian Identity cultist! Hmmm, I wonder what I shall do with this information that the Bible says Adam and Eve ate the Son...

Did your literal indwelling angel help you with this theory?

Hello theLords

I havent been following this thread from the beginning. What do you mean by ate the Son?

 

[Sam21]

Hilarious! Suspended, now?

If you've ever planned a garden, you'd know that some beautifully designed gardens have a prominent specimen that is central. Your poor ability to interpret the Scriptures is fairly alarming--and dangerous to the spiritually gullible.

Well spoken and true.

 

[westtexas]

although I realize this has been a debate of theologians for a long time. I just sided with the angelic interpretation because

Hello Tim, thanks for the reply. I agree, there are good scriptural defenses on both sides of this debate. I believe the "sons of God" to be the sons of Seth and the "daughters of men" to be the daughters of Cain. Let me tell you why I believe as I do.

Gen. 6:2 "that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose"KJV
Scripture says after this union that they became "mighty men" and that they inhabited the earth after the flood. Gen.6:4

Scripture says that after the flood only 8 were left. Noah, his wife, 3 sons and their 3 wives. Who was Noah's wife? I'd like to use 1 non-canonical source and then I'll stick to scripture. According to the Book of Jasher 5:14&15 -God told Noah to take a wife and he chose Naamah, the sister of Tubal-Cain. Cain's lineage down to Naamah is listed in Gen. 4:17-22

After the flood Canaan was cursed because of what his father Ham had done. Another of Ham's sons was Cush who begat Nimrod who scripture says "Began to be mighty upon the earth" 1 Chron.1:8-16 lists the lineage of Ham which includes Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, Hivites, Arkites, etc. When the Israelite people entered the promised land they were told to drive out these people and make no covenants with them. I believe this would include a marriage covenant.

Upon entering the promised land scripture says "Thus the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons; and they served their Gods. So the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord" Judges 3:5-7

Before the flood the sons of Seth (sons of God) united with the daughters of Cain(daughters of men) and produced these "mighty men". After the flood, the Godly line of Shem(sons of God) united with the daughters of Ham (daughters of men) and again produced these Giants and "mighty men" of scripture. As you said, after the flood, scripture only lists giants in the promised land. Is it because this is where the lineage of Ham settled? Did Ham, through Naamah, carry on the lineage of Cain?
Thanks again for your reply and for listening to mine. Any thoughts?
God bless you my brother, Westtexas

 

[Sam21]

Hello Tim, thanks for the reply. I agree, there are good scriptural defenses on both sides of this debate. I believe the "sons of God" to be the sons of Seth and the "daughters of men" to be the daughters of Cain. Let me tell you why I believe as I do.

Gen. 6:2 "that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose"KJV
Scripture says after this union that they became "mighty men" and that they inhabited the earth after the flood. Gen.6:4

Scripture says that after the flood only 8 were left. Noah, his wife, 3 sons and their 3 wives. Who was Noah's wife? I'd like to use 1 non-canonical source and then I'll stick to scripture. According to the Book of Jasher 5:14&15 -God told Noah to take a wife and he chose Naamah, the sister of Tubal-Cain. Cain's lineage down to Naamah is listed in Gen. 4:17-22

After the flood Canaan was cursed because of what his father Ham had done. Another of Ham's sons was Cush who begat Nimrod who scripture says "Began to be mighty upon the earth" 1 Chron.1:8-16 lists the lineage of Ham which includes Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, Hivites, Arkites, etc. When the Israelite people entered the promised land they were told to drive out these people and make no covenants with them. I believe this would include a marriage covenant.

Upon entering the promised land scripture says "Thus the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons; and they served their Gods. So the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord" Judges 3:5-7

Before the flood the sons of Seth (sons of God) united with the daughters of Cain(daughters of men) and produced these "mighty men". After the flood, the Godly line of Shem(sons of God) united with the daughters of Ham (daughters of men) and again produced these Giants and "mighty men" of scripture. As you said, after the flood, scripture only lists giants in the promised land. Is it because this is where the lineage of Ham settled? Did Ham, through Naamah, carry on the lineage of Cain?
Thanks again for your reply and for listening to mine. Any thoughts?
God bless you my brother, Westtexas

The problem I see is that the sons of Seth were sons of Adam and the sons of Cain were sons of Adam...SAME. Also why would the sons of Adam through a union of the descendents of Seth and Cain produce anything but a natural normal son of Adam, the bible says that the union of the sons of God with the daughters of men produced men of unusual physical ability.