Angels Do Not Have Sex

[Deborah13]

Yes, I can. There are a number of places where the New Testament tells us what we need to be saved. You know them as well as I do, so I won't quote them all here. But none of them mention anything about angels' genitals nor about reading or quoting extra-Biblical books. If those things affected our salvation, it would be mentioned in the Bible. God does not make His children guess how to be saved. He tells them.

The TOG
​

Exactly, TOG.

Some people say that people who do not believe in the Rapture, like me, will not be saved because we don't interpret those Bible scriptures the way they do.
If they don't say this why would they say that someone who investigates other scriptures are in danger of destruction? Surely this particular subject in this thread is further away from a salvation issue than the rapture.

 

[Deborah13]

I don't think anyone in this thread is looking at this as a sexual deviate. But whether angels can procreate is bound to be part of the discussion.
Please remember this thread was started to discuss this very thing. Why bring it up again if that is not the intention?

Please also remember that no one persons views are to be blindly accepted by someone else.

If I had had that attitude about end times I would not have learned the things that I have that have enriched my studies and challenged me to dig deeper into the OT and brought me closer to God not further away.

 

[kickedoutofchurch]

Kicked,
Much of what you present here is worthy of being discussed but not in the thread about angels having sex. I pray you will start a thread about your New Covenant Christian views but this string is aqlready to far off track because I tried to explain the reasoning I was taught to use by the Spirit.

Thank you for that reminder. Again, I need to ask for forgiveness as this forum is different than any other one I have ever been on. All others allowed freedom to discuss wherever the conversation went. I do understand the reason - to not have 58 different topics going, but I wonder are we taking that too far as it really restricts me in supporting my answer. Just like in advanced math class, the teacher would NEVER accept just the answer. You always had to provide the background work (supporting information) that helped a person to arrive at the answer. This is very difficult for me to stay on a particular exact topic as the background information is extremely relevant or the answer will mean nothing. (The "teacher" will not accept it)

Perhaps someone can help me to figure out how this will be done. Am I to create a separate thread or post to provide all the supporting information for my answer?

thanks,

Kicked

 

[th1b.taylor]

If you've read the string you've noticed I have supported my answers and then returned to the topic. I do very strongly support the teaching of scripture not to use the Bible to make an argument (Proof Texting) and that I will ignore most efforts to proof text and not join them in their sin.

Having said that I do need to repent of going there myself, at times.

 

[Deborah13]

Thank you for that reminder. Again, I need to ask for forgiveness as this forum is different than any other one I have ever been on. All others allowed freedom to discuss wherever the conversation went. I do understand the reason - to not have 58 different topics going, but I wonder are we taking that too far as it really restricts me in supporting my answer. Just like in advanced math class, the teacher would NEVER accept just the answer. You always had to provide the background work (supporting information) that helped a person to arrive at the answer. This is very difficult for me to stay on a particular exact topic as the background information is extremely relevant or the answer will mean nothing. (The "teacher" will not accept it)

Perhaps someone can help me to figure out how this will be done. Am I to create a separate thread or post to provide all the supporting information for my answer?

thanks,

Kicked

I'll send you a PM.

 

[kickedoutofchurch]

If you've read the string you've noticed I have supported my answers and then returned to the topic. I do very strongly support the teaching of scripture not to use the Bible to make an argument (Proof Texting) and that I will ignore most efforts to proof text and not join them in their sin.

Having said that I do need to repent of going there myself, at times.

I do very strongly support the teaching of scripture not to use the Bible to make an argument (Proof Texting) and that I will ignore most efforts to proof text and not join them in their sin.

I don't understand what this means. Can you please clarify? Or would that take us off topic. Feel free to start a personal conversation. Isn't anytime we provide scripture for support "using the Bible to make an argument?" At least that is how I see it. What other sources does a believer have to speak and show the truth?

God bless,

Kicked

 

[kickedoutofchurch]

I may take a short break from here and work on my blog today and possibly tomorrow. You guys have a great day.

 

[th1b.taylor]

I don't understand what this means. Can you please clarify? Or would that take us off topic. Feel free to start a personal conversation. Isn't anytime we provide scripture for support "using the Bible to make an argument?" At least that is how I see it. What other sources does a believer have to speak and show the truth?

God bless,

Kicked

I can clarify it if you ask in a string on the subject.

 

[Deborah13]

Yeah, exactly. I was writing much the same thing wile you were posting. This is a non-salvational issue and we should all try to not get so worked up about it and take offense. truth can be stranger than fiction. If the Angel view is wrong, great! Let some godly and wise brother post scriptures and truths which will debunk it. That is never done in these threads on this topic by anyone. that leads me to believe that...well, you know.

Bless you all in Christ.

I think that maybe the answer to the question of how there could be these giants who were mighty men could be before the flood and after the flood is in Genesis 9-10. Follow the line of Ham.
Gen 10:8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
Gen 10:9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.
From Ham came the nations of the Canaanites which included the Amorites and the Philistim.

The giant man Og, was the king of the Amorites.

Noah was the one who God found righteous, not necessarily his sons.

 

[Gary]

I do very strongly support the teaching of scripture not to use the Bible to make an argument (Proof Texting) and that I will ignore most efforts to proof text and not join them in their sin.

I don't understand what this means. Can you please clarify? Or would that take us off topic. Feel free to start a personal conversation. Isn't anytime we provide scripture for support "using the Bible to make an argument?" At least that is how I see it. What other sources does a believer have to speak and show the truth?

2 Timothy 3
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.


There is no other source for the Truth and anyone who says different is being deceptive. It is not a sin to use the scriptures to show biblical truths. In fact it is encouraged.


Acts 17
11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
.

 

[JLB]

I think that maybe the answer to the question of how there could be these giants who were mighty men could be before the flood and after the flood is in Genesis 9-10. Follow the line of Ham.
Gen 10:8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
Gen 10:9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.
From Ham came the nations of the Canaanites which included the Amorites and the Philistim.

The giant man Og, was the king of the Amorites.

Noah was the one who God found righteous, not necessarily his sons.

The key word is Nephilim (giants) not mighty men.

Otherwise you would have to lump David's mighty men in with the Nephilum and Nimrod.

There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. Genesis 6:4

Nephilim were created ONE way, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men.

Not when the descendants of Ham or Cush came into the daughters of men, but WHEN the sons of God came into the daughters of men.

JLB

 

[th1b.taylor]

(Post removed, ToS 2.4, Address issues not personalities. Respect where people are in their spiritual walk, and respect all others in general. Obadiah)

 

[Edward]

I think that maybe the answer to the question of how there could be these giants who were mighty men could be before the flood and after the flood is in Genesis 9-10. Follow the line of Ham.
Gen 10:8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
Gen 10:9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.
From Ham came the nations of the Canaanites which included the Amorites and the Philistim.

The giant man Og, was the king of the Amorites.

Noah was the one who God found righteous, not necessarily his sons.

Agreed sister. Also, speaking of the Canaanites, when the Lord commanded (Joshua?) to go in and kill them all including man, women and children sparing no one...this is one of those things that many have a problem with, that God is supposed to be such a merciful God and yet ordered the genocide of an entire race of people (it does sound harsh!)...on the surface it is hard to understand at first (was for me too!), but! if looked at with the perspective of fallen Angels/Hybrids contaminating the gene pool (so that Christ could not be born!), and God was countering Satan's move here...it begins to make sense. That would be a good reason to do genocide on an entire race.

Which lends even more credence to the Angel theory in my mind.

2 Timothy 3
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.


There is no other source for the Truth and anyone who says different is being deceptive. It is not a sin to use the scriptures to show biblical truths. In fact it is encouraged.


Acts 17
11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
.

Excellent point brother. thank you for pointing that out. :yes

 

[jasonc]

Agreed sister. Also, speaking of the Canaanites, when the Lord commanded (Joshua?) to go in and kill them all including man, women and children sparing no one...this is one of those things that many have a problem with, that God is supposed to be such a merciful God and yet ordered the genocide of an entire race of people (it does sound harsh!)...on the surface it is hard to understand at first (was for me too!), but! if looked at with the perspective of fallen Angels/Hybrids contaminating the gene pool (so that Christ could not be born!), and God was countering Satan's move here...it begins to make sense. That would be a good reason to do genocide on an entire race.

Which lends even more credence to the Angel theory in my mind.



Excellent point brother. thank you for pointing that out. :yes

so what about Egypt then? god slew the first born of every house that didn't have the blood on the door. some of them were saved.or the cities of Sodom and gommorah. children died in those.

 

[Deborah13]

Agreed sister. Also, speaking of the Canaanites, when the Lord commanded (Joshua?) to go in and kill them all including man, women and children sparing no one...this is one of those things that many have a problem with, that God is supposed to be such a merciful God and yet ordered the genocide of an entire race of people (it does sound harsh!)...on the surface it is hard to understand at first (was for me too!), but! if looked at with the perspective of fallen Angels/Hybrids contaminating the gene pool (so that Christ could not be born!), and God was countering Satan's move here...it begins to make sense. That would be a good reason to do genocide on an entire race.

Which lends even more credence to the Angel theory in my mind.



Excellent point brother. thank you for pointing that out. :yes

You missed my point. It appears to me that.....

The Amorites (King Og of the Bashan (Amorite) who was one of these giant people) were the descendants of Ham the youngest son of Noah. see Genesis 10

Gen 10:15 And Canaan hath begotten Sidon his first-born, and Heth,
Gen 10:16 and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite,


Deu 3:11 for only Og king of Bashan had been left of the remnant of the Rephaim; lo, his bedstead is a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the sons of Ammon? nine cubits its length, and four cubits its breadth, by the cubit of a man.

Deu 31:4 and Jehovah hath done to them as he hath done to Sihon and to Og, kings of the Amorite, and to their land, whom He destroyed.

No angels involved.

 

[Edward]

so what about Egypt then? god slew the first born of every house that didn't have the blood on the door. some of them were saved.or the cities of Sodom and gommorah. children died in those.

I don't know jason. I have little idea what was in the Lords mind when He did that. I do know one thing though, that if the Lord did it, then He had a very good reason to do that there, for He is a just God.

Some off the cuff speculation about that may be;
So that all would know that He is THE Lord thy God, and it is dangerous to have any other Gods before Him. (The Egyptians had many weird gods)
Perhaps the Egyptians were flying too close to the sun and were playing with hybridization or had hybrids among themselves also? (My understanding is that they did a lot of that sort of thing, and it is attested to with all of the half human-half animal statues that they have/had)
If any of the children that died, were pure or innocent, then keep in mind that God is life and earthly death is nothing for Him to defeat, so those children could/would have been taken without pain and probably handsomely rewarded in heaven for it.

His thoughts are above our thoughts, and His ways above our ways. If we don't understand it, it doesn't mean that He is unjust, just that we are feeble minded and do not grasp His ways or intent. I would certainly never blame God or call Him unjust or question Him or anything of the sort, for that would undoubtedly be a mistake of the highest magnitude.

 

[jasonc]

actually the torah tells us what Egypt did, and why. its also told in genesis to Abraham. the jews believe that isreal was sent to Egypt as punishment for Abrahams sin. he went to Egypt whilst in the land of promise. god didn't tell him to do that. so I believe Egypt like Babylon was broken for to the things they did to isreal. when god told Judah that they would be in captivity the words used were the exact same. the sins of Egypt in general were no different then what the romans did, the greeks. the greeks traded with Egypt and so did other cultures. the torah wasn't just written in Hebrew but of the tounges of the seventy nations. the mixed multitude of goy were of those lands. hattusa was around then.

Egypt didn't do that anyway. they were smart but didn't toy with that. other nations did the same. baal was a half human and goat who stood. the god of the philistines dagon was a man with fish head and human body. the greeks had gods that looked human. tiamat

Though Tiamat is often described by modern authors as a sea serpent or dragon, no ancient texts exist in which there is a clear association with those kinds of creatures, and the identification is debated.[9] The Enûma Elish specifically states that Tiamat did give birth to dragons and serpents, but they are included among a larger and more general list of monsters including scorpion men and merpeople, none of which imply that any of the children resemble the mother or are even limited to aquatic creatures.

In the Enûma Elish her physical description includes a tail, a thigh, "lower parts" (which shake together), a belly, an udder, ribs, a neck, a head, a skull, eyes, nostrils, a mouth, and lips. She has insides (possibly "entrails"), a heart, arteries, and blood.

The strictly modern depiction of Tiamat as a multi-headed dragon was popularized in the 1970s as a fixture of the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game inspired by earlier sources associating Tiamat with later mythological characters, such as Lotan.[10]

from tiamat on Wikipedia. this is where you must go then after the flood now with all these men doing the same thing and satan in it. god will judge as he sees fit. I don't have a problem with him slaying the innocent. he slew jesus. surely he wasn't a half-breed.

 

[Edward]

You missed my point. It appears to me that.....

The Amorites (King Og of the Bashan (Amorite) who was one of these giant people) were the descendants of Ham the youngest son of Noah. see Genesis 10

Gen 10:15 And Canaan hath begotten Sidon his first-born, and Heth,
Gen 10:16 and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite,


Deu 3:11 for only Og king of Bashan had been left of the remnant of the Rephaim; lo, his bedstead is a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the sons of Ammon? nine cubits its length, and four cubits its breadth, by the cubit of a man.

Deu 31:4 and Jehovah hath done to them as he hath done to Sihon and to Og, kings of the Amorite, and to their land, whom He destroyed.

No angels involved.

Oh, sorry sister. I went off on a tangent a bit there. My reply would take us back to genesis 6 first, it says ...there were giants in the earth in those days, and also after that..., We don't seem to know definitively how they came about again, however, I am aware of the conjecture which theorizes that Noah inadvertently took Nephilim genes aboard the ark with him. Noah's passengers aboard the ark, were his wife, 3 sons, and their wives with them. Scripture only really states that Noah was pure, it does not say that his sons or their wives were. With me so far? Ok, now we go to Genesis 9, wherein an incident of Noah being drunk with wine in the tent. Ham (Canaans father and the father of the Canaanites) went into the tent and came out and told his brothers. For some unknown reason, this angered Noah when he awoke. but instead of cursing Ham (the alleged offender) He cursed Canaan, his grandson. Now does that make sense? Not really.

So the conjecture is that Noah seen Canaan, and that Canaan had 6 fingers and toes and Noah knew what this meant (Nephilim genes. Remember Goliath? 6 fingers and toes, giant...Nephilim.) So that is why (conjecturally) that Noah cursed canaan and not Ham. Because he knew that Nephilim genes had made it onto the ark, and that it would start again. Could Hams wife have been pregnant when she entered the ark? Or at least carrying Nephilim genes within her? Or maybe it was Ham?

At any rate, this could have been how the ...and also after that...could occur without the participation of Angels for round two of the Nephilim. I believe that it is a reasonable conjecture that could explain it.

 

[jasonc]

the hittites were part of isreal. urijah the Hittite , the Hittite were the sons of canaan.

 

[JLB]

You missed my point. It appears to me that.....

The Amorites (King Og of the Bashan (Amorite) who was one of these giant people) were the descendants of Ham the youngest son of Noah. see Genesis 10

Gen 10:15 And Canaan hath begotten Sidon his first-born, and Heth,
Gen 10:16 and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite,


Deu 3:11 for only Og king of Bashan had been left of the remnant of the Rephaim; lo, his bedstead is a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the sons of Ammon? nine cubits its length, and four cubits its breadth, by the cubit of a man.

Deu 31:4 and Jehovah hath done to them as he hath done to Sihon and to Og, kings of the Amorite, and to their land, whom He destroyed.

No angels involved.

Says who?