Unraveling Revelation: There Were Giants in the Earth in Those Days

[Carry_Your_Name]

With all due respect, anyone can read this verse without the Greek to know what the word lasciviousness means. I'm sorry, but I have to stand my ground in not believing fallen angels have genitals producing sperm.

Yeah, YOUR ground, denounced by the bible.

... knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. (2 Pt. 1:20-21)

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Maybe think harder about your response to what I said.

I come here with response to what the bible says, not what you says, since you consistently disregard what the bible says by superimposing with your own false doctrine.

 

[Free]

I come here with response to what the bible says, not what you says,

But, that’s what I was getting at—you didn’t come with a biblical response; you came with your opinion.

I said: “There is nothing in the Bible about the return of giants.”

The context of which was in response to Matt. 24:37, when Christ returns.

You replied: ‘Oh really? Then how did the giants manage to make a comeback, since they existed "afterwards"? How did they return in Moses's and David's times?‘

Your response has nothing to do with “giants” making a return sometime prior to Christ’s return. There is nothing in the Bible that states that, especially if one wants to say that they’re Nephilim. That is pure speculation that no Christian should be engaged in.

It looks as though you haven’t even studied how many times nephil appears in Scripture (only three times), nor why the KJV erroneously or mistakenly translates it as “giants.”

since you consistently disregard what the bible says by superimposing with your own false doctrine.

That’s what you’re doing. Your previous response is a case in point. The main issue is that you lack the requisite humility for serious discussion and biblical interpretation. I haven’t said anything different here than many theologians and biblical scholars. They agree that “sons of God” most likely doesn’t refer to angels, but rather most likely refers to humans. I have been saying that is a legitimate interpretation and you have disagreed, saying that it is false doctrine. I would love to see your arrogance on display as you try telling an expert that they believe a false doctrine. You don’t even know enough to know that you could be wrong.

 

[RedPill]

Either start a new thread to discuss your demonic beliefs or stop bringing them up

You're way over the top here, Free. Now that false accusation is a violation of 1.6 of the ToS. Worse, it's a violation of scripture: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. (Exo. 20:16).

Shame on you.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I said: “There is nothing in the Bible about the return of giants.”

Lord Jesus himself compared the end times with the days of Noah where there were giants on earth, who are you to rule out the possibility of the giants' return? How do you know with absolute certainty that they won't return, even though they had returned?

Your response has nothing to do with “giants” making a return sometime prior to Christ’s return. There is nothing in the Bible that states that, especially if one wants to say that they’re Nephilim.

Again, how do you know for sure that they won't? Go check out Num. 13:33 in any reliable, credible bible translation, where the giants were specifically, umambiguously identified as Nephilim, same word, and this also explains who the Nephilim were in Gen. 6, as long as the bible's consistent.

That is pure speculation that no Christian should be engaged in.

Eugenics and transhumanism are real things, those are not speculation. In Gen. 6:12, all flesh were corrupt; in Rev. 13:16, everyone was forced to make an image to the beast - as opposed to the image of God in which mankind was created. Lord Jesus compared the latter with the former, are you gonna accuse him of speculating?

It looks as though you haven’t even studied how many times nephil appears in Scripture (only three times), nor why the KJV erroneously or mistakenly translates it as “giants.”

Scholars who translated the KJV have more credibility than you, a random guy on the internet who thinks he's more knowledgeable in the bible than the very translators of the bible. Where's your humility?

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

That’s what you’re doing. Your previous response is a case in point. The main issue is that you lack the requisite humility for serious discussion and biblical interpretation. I haven’t said anything different here than many theologians and biblical scholars.

Yeah, as though in your previous sentence you hadn't challenged the theologians and scholars who translated the KJV in the first place, upon which all subsequent "many theologians and biblical scholars" developed their theologies.

They agree that “sons of God” most likely doesn’t refer to angels, but rather most likely refers to humans.

And I side with scholars such as late Michael Heiser who agree that “sons of God” most likely refer to angels, not humans, especially in the OT narrative. In the end of the day it's just your source against mine. The difference is, I let the bible interpret itself, I stick to a consistent, coherent biblical narrative, you appeal to authority and feed your own ego.

I have been saying that is a legitimate interpretation and you have disagreed, saying that it is false doctrine. I would love to see your arrogance on display as you try telling an expert that they believe a false doctrine. You don’t even know enough to know that you could be wrong.

How is that legitimate when it has been repeatedly debunked? That sons of God are evil (Job. 1:6, Ps. 82:6-7)? That "calling upon the name of the Lord" is lip service (Is. 1:15, Matt. 7:21)? That angelic form and human form are different (1 Cor. 15:40, Gen. 19:5)? Have you addressed any of these with any valid argument rooted in the word of God, instead of defending your own assumptions? I didn't tell any "expert" that they believe a false doctrine, I only called you out for believing a false doctrine, you seems to exalt yourself as an "expert", And you have the audacity to call me arrogant? Man, you're beyond reproach.

 

[hawkman]

I finally listened to the whole of that video.

Thank you . You did check it out .

To me so much speculation, theories, (as they call their view) and very little back up.

Usually they do give where to look for where their ideas are coming from . I will have to re-watch this video because it has been about 3 years since I first watched it .

So, the crux of it was that those fallen angels having relationship with women brought forth hybrids - demons.

Nephilim (hybrids) . I think demons are the disembodied spirits of the Nephilim killed in the flood .
Where do you think demons came from ?

Only one source and God is not going to give so called hybrids a spirit.

Why not ?

 

[hawkman]

Moderator time out called while we review thread .