Any thoughts on this? No exploding heads please.

[marks]

And actually less. Jesus likened physical death to sleeping.

Yes, and Paul did also. And Daniel. I'm seeing a theme here though that the actually wording of the Bible is disregarded in favor of more suitable understandings lest you end up thinking some crazy thing!

One of my real issues with this sort of interpretation isn't about what you think the nephilim were, to me that is fully secondary. But are we fully submitted to the text? If plain meanings are discarded in favor of things that aren't written, and when words are defined without any interest in how that doesn't work in other passages, what am I to think?

That's what seems crazy to me.

Much love!

 

[Wrangler]

You can admit you don’t understand the concept

False. I reject the false concept that I do understand.

Throughout my life believers have falsely equated me not understanding with me rejecting a false idea.

IF Rev 2 & 20 had it, you would have quoted it.

 

[Mr E]

Since ALL men will one day raise to be judged, can you think of a better word than sleeping to convey that they will again wake in the future, some to eternal life and others to the lake which is the second death?

No, I think that’s perfect. It conveys the idea that physical death is no more than a temporary condition. Nothing to fear from a believer’s perspective.

 

[Mr E]

False. I reject the false concept that I do understand.

Throughout my life believers have falsely equated me not understanding with me rejecting a false idea.

IF Rev 2 & 20 had it, you would have quoted it.

False! By similar proclamation.

I don’t have to quote— I referenced the material for you. Don’t be lazy.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Yes, and Paul did also. And Daniel. I'm seeing a theme here though that the actually wording of the Bible is disregarded in favor of more suitable understandings lest you end up thinking some crazy thing!

One of my real issues with this sort of interpretation isn't about what you think the nephilim were, to me that is fully secondary. But are we fully submitted to the text? If plain meanings are discarded in favor of things that aren't written, and when words are defined without any interest in how that doesn't work in other passages, what am I to think?

That's what seems crazy to me.

Much love!

Are you fully submitted to what the text says? I don’t think so.
Earlier, when I showed how even with basic reading comprehension, what you saw was not there stated, your answer was, people are different you know.

So here I am posting it again. And, by the way, I had three separate unbelievers or agnostics read the phrase and told them I was giving them a quick reading comprehension test With the sentence: There were nephilim on the earth in those days, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of mankind.

All three unbelievers read it and all three then asked me the exact same question - what are nephilim, because I’m going to fail your comprehension test already.
I said, it’s not necessary to understand what the word means to pass the test. Then I asked them, is this sentence saying that nephilim and sons of God are the same thing? They all three answered no, and I told them they passed the test, at which time, all three of them once again said the same exact thing to me - okay, that’s good, but what are nephilim?

There were nephilim on earth in those days, when the Sons of God came into the daughters of mankind.
There were chickens in the yard when I was a young girl, when my parents raised me.
If you “take that sentence like you find it,” is your conclusion that I was raised by chickens? (Wrangler can have a field day with that sentence. I’m writing the jokes myself! )
But no, you don’t arrive at that conclusion. But why not? I’ve applied the same logic (or lack thereof) and the same hidden rule as you applied to the first sentence.
Have you taken both sentences as they are? Or have you filtered the first one through something?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

False. I reject the false concept that I do understand.

Lol. Punctuation is your friend.

 

[Wrangler]

False! By similar proclamation.

Not quite. I showed how it is figurative speech in a book that is highly figurative, as opposed to mystical. Response? Crickets.

Speculating "could be" (mystical reality) goes outside basic reading comprehension. Why reach for mystical reality when figure of speech is explanatory?

 

[Wrangler]

Lol. Punctuation is your friend.

Yes but time is often not my friend.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

At its core, the concept of Mysticism refers to the belief that one can know the spiritual truths of life and the universe that are beyond the intellect by being absorbed into the Deity through contemplation and self-surrender.

Not that I like all that much “by being absorbed into the Deity.” I would say more like…being swept up into Gods kingdom. But, you know.

 

[marks]

There were nephilim on the earth in those days, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of mankind.

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at here. This statement says neither that the nephilim were the sons of God, nor does it say the nephilim were produced by the sons of God, only that these were concurrent in time. Is that what you understand it to say?

Much love!

 

[Wrangler]

At its core, the concept of Mysticism refers to the belief that one can know the spiritual truths of life and the universe that are beyond the intellect by being absorbed into the Deity through contemplation and self-surrender.

Well, that's one definition. The definition I use is the assertion of obtaining knowledge beyond rational means.

This definition does not include divine revelation, whisperings of the Holy Spirit, Angels or other supernatural communication. For instance, Moses talked to a burning bush. Jesus walked on water. These are presented in Scripture as historical facts. This is different than supposing the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at here. This statement says neither that the nephilim were the sons of God, nor does it say the nephilim were produced by the sons of God, only that these were concurrent in time. Is that what you understand it to say?

Much love!

Not sure why I had to pull so many of your teeth yesterday then…
So the sentence does not state that nephilim are sons of God.
You just lost one of the three verses the doctrine is built on.

But who are the sons of God then?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Well, that's one definition. The definition I use is the assertion of obtaining knowledge beyond rational means.

Do You mean like this - To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to the rest they are told in parables, so that while seeing they may not see, and while hearing they may not understand.

 

[Taken]

I've heard that some think the mythological Titans were these offspring. Seems reasonable to me.

And then there's Jude,

Jude 1:6-7 KJV
6) And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
7) Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

"in like manner", that is, they did the same thing. Giving themselves over to fornication, I think we all know what that means. "Going after strange (heteros- of a different kind) flesh".

The men of Sodom were trying to have sex with the angels. And in the same way, these angels which left their habitation (oiketerion - used one other place) had sex with women. In like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, going after flesh of a different kind.

This word habitation, oiketerion, is used one other place in the Bible,

2 Corinthians 5:2 KJV
2) For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

And apparently this happened both before and after the flood. And the spirits of their offspring are the unclean spirits we saw in Jesus' day, and until now. Neither angel nor man, they roam dry places seeking a body to inhabit. The "Rapha", there's a very interesting word to track through the OT, and tells you more of their story.

Much love!

When I think of “estate”, I think of an “established habitat”.
When I think of an “established habitat”, I think of what was “specifically established” for what.

Specifics...Gods Creation...Heaven(S) and Earth.
* All of the Heaven(S) is Gods Kingdom.
* High Heaven, above the Stars, is Gods “estate”.
* Mid Heaven, is the Created Celestial ‘hosts’ “estate”.
* Lower Heaven, is the Vast Boundary Line.
(And like with the Invisible God, imo, He routinely gives us parallel glimpses, to make sense of that which we are not yet able to see with earthly eyes.)
* Heaven(S), Births, Deaths, do not exist.

* Earth, is the Created Terrestrials “estate”.
* Earth, Birth and Death, does exist.
* The ‘estate’ for all of man-kind, today, tomorrow, forever.

Celestial beings...FIRST estate...mid heavens.
* As Faithful Servants to God, they have Duties.
Exercise their Freewill to Reject Faithfully Serving God? God is Just, and will make sure an Unfaithful Servant shall receive what he desires.
Along with what an Unfaithful Servant desires comes a different estate.
For Celestial beings, they are allowed to share the Estate of Terrestrials/ Earth.

Terrestrial man-Kind....First estate...Face of the Earth.
* As Faithful Servants to God, they have Duties.
Exercise their Freewill to Reject Faithfully Serving God? God is Just, and will make sure an Unfaithful Servant shall receive what he desires.
Also a different estate...Center IN the Earth.
* And Eventually, Unfaithful Celestials and Unfaithful Terrestrial man-kind, will Get what they desire: an “estate”, that is VOID of God, whom they expressly wanted avoidance and escape from.

And what about the Celestial “hosts”, and man-kind beings that have Freely Elected to have a Forever Faithful Relationship and Presence with God?

Faithful Celestials and faithful Mankind’s Estates forever shall be as was created and made, Heaven and Earth. But, but, but....wait...remember that Barrier, Lower Heavens? As God created and made the Barrier, so also is He the Master of “re-MAKING”. Making what was blurry, obscure, unseen....
New eyes, that can SEE spiritual things...(in that new body!!)
AND the the Heavens and the Face of the Earth become ONE Kingdom of God. One estate for ALL Celestials and Terrestrial man-kind, who Exercised their Freewill to Choose to be Faithful to God and With Him forever.

Big Picture...

Matt 6:
[10] Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

And Gods precise bit by bit, step by step, order and way...
1) To be Included In Gods Kingdom on Earth, is expressly revealed in Scripture...
AND
2) To be Excluded from Gods Kingdom on Earth, is ALSO expressly revealed in Scripture.

Men have degrees and solicit their services in “ESTATE PLANNING”... ;-)
Don’t get sidetracked....and not pay attention to Gods solicitation of His Service for “His ESTATE PLANNING”...

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I don't have a clue what you are going on about, but I think I've covered the material. You've gone into some kind of mocking mode, I'm not interested.

Much love!

I AM NOT MOCKING YOU.

Im just laughing at how yesterday, your answer was: it depends on how you look at it, people are different you know.

 

[marks]

Im just laughing at how yesterday, your answer was: it depends on how you look at it, people are different you know.

Different question.

I suppose I could see that also, but unless I have some compelling reason, I just take it like I find it. I find the Bible has consistency in how God uses His terms, but that's just me.

Much love!

Oh that’s not really what we do though. We don’t just take it like we find it. None of us do. We take it through filters of our own assumptions, assumptions of others, learned doctrines we hear repeated, life experiences, prejudices, hopes, fears, and more I haven’t listed.

That depends on you. People can be very different from each other, you realize.

I still think this, that different people are just that, different, maybe even very different from each other.

Much love!

 

[marks]

So the sentence does not state that nephilim are sons of God.

I've never said the nephilim are "sons of God", you know. It's not what I think. Nephilim are the progeny of the union between these angels who left their heavenly body to father children with human women. These were the nephilim, who's "spirits" are known through the OT as the rapha, destroyed in the flood, with no resurrection, unclean spirits who roam dry places until they can inhabit a body, as they had been used to. Until the day in which they are all cast into the abyss. As I understand this.

Much love!

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Different question.







I still think this, that different people are just that, different, maybe even very different from each other.

Much love!

Oh no you don’t I’m gonna tan yer hide marks! you have not gathered all the posts and not the right posts. No way man. Because yesterday, you insisted, for hours, sons of God there meant fallen angels!
Then that led to me gathering all the verses that showed men as sons of God and children of God and showing that there were many, many more of those than the 3 verses men say show fallen angels being called sons of God in order to support the theory that angels had sex with humans. Then you said “children of God” did not apply and it had to say “sons of God.” so I struck through all those and was STILL left with many more verses that called men sons of God than the three you claimed referred to fallen angels as sons of God.
oh, if you were here I’d throw my SHOE at you!!

 

[marks]

sons of God there meant fallen angels!

Yes, that's what I'm saying, but not based on some supposed equivalence between "nephilim" and "sons of God". And the posts are all right there where they were . . . go look for yourself.

C'mon . . . you said "no exploding heads"!

Maybe it's breaktime . . .

Much love!

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I've never said the nephilim are "sons of God", you know. It's not what I think. Nephilim are the progeny of the union between these angels who left their heavenly body to father children with human women. These were the nephilim, who's "spirits" are known through the OT as the rapha, destroyed in the flood, with no resurrection, unclean spirits who roam dry places until they can inhabit a body, as they had been used to. Until the day in which they are all cast into the abyss. As I understand this.

Much love!

You did not have an hours long conversation with me over how sons of God in that verse referred to fallen angels? Ooh you stinker don’t make me go get the posts!