I found this to be confirmation of by belief that the Nephilim will return before the Kingdom Age.

Quote:

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Daniel 2: 41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. 43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. Genesis 6: 1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. 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 bore children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And GOD 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.

I have heard this arguement in tha past, but am not convinced. What purpose would it serve that they come back?
Mankind is more than able to wreck havoc over the earth!

Remember who first reeked havoc in Heaven and then Earth. Most folks take Jesus' statement to be figurative, but what if it is more literal than we dare realize? Like only one family being delivered out of the tribulation?

One family can be quiet extensive, especially when it is the Royal Family of God - also known as the Church!

Which statement is it you refer to, as being taken figuaritive or literal?

"As the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be," most that i've heard talk about this acknowledge some parts being literal, but most of "the days of Noah" is just a figurative analogy. IMHO: it will be more literal than any of us are willing to dare to believe, more wicked than the things going on in Sodom and Gomorrah.

Referring to the last sentence in your last post, I have often thought that we have no idea just how bad things may get before the exit resurrection of the Church - which I believe is before the tribulation begins.

After the exchange above I began thinking about having satan filled giants on earth, and I must admit that is a scarey thought!

Very scary things are going on and even scarier things are coming, like talk about the return of the guillotine for execution of the death penalty over lethal-injection. Jesus did an interesting thing; while He told us to "know the season of the Last Days," He directed us to focus on His soon return. If not for this focus, I don't know how anyone makes it through a day in this fallen world.

The state of Georgia, here in the good old US of A already has a guillotine in place and has had since 1996!

Georgia House of Representatives HB 1274
Death Penalty; Guillotine Provisions


Georgia House of Representatives - 1995/1996 Sessions
HB 1274 - Death penalty; guillotine provisions
Page Numbers - 1/ 2
Code Sections - 17-10-38/ 17-10-44
Prev Bill Next Bill Bill Summary Bill List Disclaimer
1. Teper 61st

House Comm: SJudy / Senate Comm: /
House Vote: Yeas Nays Senate Vote: Yeas Nays
----------------------------------------
House Action Senate
----------------------------------------
1/12/96 Read 1st Time
1/22/96 Read 2nd Time
----------------------------------------

Code Sections amended:
HB 1274 LC 21 3643

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT



1- 1 To amend Article 2 of Chapter 10 of Title 17 of the Official
1- 2 Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to the death penalty
1- 3 generally, so as to provide a statement of legislative
1- 4 policy; to provide for death by guillotine; to provide for
1- 5 applicability; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other
1- 6 purposes.

1- 7 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:

SECTION 1.

1- 8 The General Assembly finds that while prisoners condemned to
1- 9 death may wish to donate one or more of their organs for
1-10 transplant, any such desire is thwarted by the fact that
1-11 electrocution makes all such organs unsuitable for
1-12 transplant. The intent of the General Assembly in enacting
1-13 this legislation is to provide for a method of execution
1-14 which is compatible with the donation of organs by a
1-15 condemned prisoner.

SECTION 2.

1-16 Article 2 of Chapter 10 of Title 17 of the Official Code of
1-17 Georgia Annotated, relating to the death penalty generally,
1-18 is amended by striking in its entirety Code Section
1-19 17-10-38, relating to death sentences generally, and
1-20 inserting in lieu thereof the following:

1-21 "17-10-38. (Index)

1-22 (a) All persons who have been convicted of a capital
1-23 offense and have had imposed upon them a sentence of death
1-24 shall, at the election of the condemned, suffer such
1-25 punishment either by electrocution or by guillotine. If
1-26 the condemned fails to make an election by the thirtieth
1-27 day preceding the date scheduled for execution, punishment
1-28 shall be by electrocution.

1-29 (b) In all cases in which the defendant is sentenced to be
1-30 electrocuted executed, it shall be the duty of the trial
1-31 judge in passing sentence to direct that the defendant be

-1- (Index)

LC 21 3643

2- 1 delivered to the Department of Corrections for
2- 2 electrocution execution at a state correctional
2- 3 institution designated by the department."

SECTION 3.

2- 4 Said article is further amended by striking in its entirety
2- 5 Code Section 17-10-44, relating to death chamber apparatus
2- 6 and related matters, and inserting in lieu thereof the
2- 7 following:

2- 8 "17-10-44. (Index)

2- 9 The Department of Corrections shall provide a death
2-10 chamber and all necessary apparatus, machinery, and
2-11 appliances for inflicting the penalty of death by
2-12 electrocution or by guillotine."

SECTION 4.

2-13 This Act shall be applicable to all executions occurring on
2-14 or after August 31, 1996.

SECTION 5.

2-15 All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are
2-16 repealed.

-2- (Index)

Office of the Clerk of the House
Robert E. Rivers, Jr., Clerk of the House
Last Updated on 01/02/97

didn't realize that... , but they did give a good humanitarian reason for offering it.

Yes they did, but it also brings to mind the Chinese, who are harvesting body parts to sell!
There was a bit of a stink when this first came to light back in the 90's. Doing a search will
reveal more information, no doubt.

i'll pass on doing that search.

Have you read Barnes' "Notes on the Bible" on Daniel 2:43? If not i would recommend reading Matthew Henry's "Commentary on the Whole Bible" first as a warm-up. They are both available for free for use in E-Sword (

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

)

I do sometimes use books other than the Bible, but feel it is its own best commentary for the most part.

i view using extrabiblical source materials no different than listening to a sermon, Bible school lesson, devotional, or reading a Christian publication.

I didn't mean to be critical. Most reading I do that is not the Bible, it is something I take a persoanl interest in.
When I was younger I was an avid reader, but I don't read so much anymore.

i, for one, would love to have more time in a reading conducive environment.

Goober_JIL wrote:

I found this to be confirmation of by belief that the Nephilim will return before the Kingdom Age. Quote: Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Daniel 2: 41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. 43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. Genesis 6: 1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. 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 bore children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And GOD 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.

Interesting isn't that the word

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

isn't found in the Bible, nor in any Strong's Concordance. It goes beyond the pale to believe or even suggest that "fallen angels" had relations with "the daughters of men."

Jesus clearly stated that there is no marriage or giving in marriage in heaven and that when the dead rise they will be just like the angels in Heaven (Matt 22:30, Mark 12:25). We can conclude that since angels do not marry, they have no need for sexual intercourse.

I'm surprised Goober that you embrace this false teaching.

As for your scripture quotes, I think it is important to include all the verses that solidify the meaning of particular individual quotes. An example might be the use of Matthew 24:37. The wicked were clearly "taken" in Noah's time. In verse 38, "For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark," in other words, they were living their lives without a care in the world nor paying any attention to the preaching and truth that Noah was giving.

This view is easily confirmed in verse 39. "And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

So clearly those that don't care, and aren't paying attention are the one's who are "taken." Matthew 24:37 has nothing to do with the "return" of giants in the Earth or "fornicating" angels.

Likewise Daniel 2 deals with the prophecy of the four kingdoms (Babylon, Media/Persia, Greece and Rome. See Daniel 7 and 8.) which are set up prior to the establishment of the coming Messiah and the political governments of Europe that are established after the coming Messiah (Daniel 2:41). This is confirmed in Daniel 2:44 - "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever."

There is nothing in Daniel 2 to suggest that "Giants" will be returning to the Earth as a result of "angels" getting it on with the "daughters of men."

Shocking Goober to see you believe this, very shocking.

Here are a few links to further explore the prophecy in the Book of Daniel:

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

The below is from:

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

"Pagans viewed the creator god as coming forth from the cosmic sea to establish the earth. The Greek Pan/Pallas was also the god Saturn or Chronos worshipped by the ancient Romans, Egyptian and Palestinians as the "beast out of the sea". In mythology, the planetary god, Saturn, emerged from the cosmic sea as the serpent who rescued the world following the chaos of Genesis 1. According to legend, Saturn founded the utopian kingdom of Atlantis and became the divine ancestor of all earthly patriarchs and kings. Another Golden Age is anticipated at which time the demonic gods of Atlantis will return to earth to initiate mankind into the ancient wisdom and transform the human race into gods. At this time, Saturn (Satan) - aka Chronos, Pan - will rise from the bottomless pit (Hell) to incarnate the false Christ/Messiah of the world religion in the occult's false millennium. The following is a brief overview of the history of the beast out of the cosmic sea.

The Nephilim: Race of the Grail

According to Dagobert's Revenge Magazine, which "is resolutely heralding the renaissance of the Arcadian Mystique," the 'Cult of the Goat' began with the star system, Capricorn, which worshipped Enki, a prototype of Satan, who was, in occult lore, the consort of Eve. This being an impossibility according to Genesis 4:1, the Anunnaki were the fallen angels (Nephilim) that descended to earth two chapters later. And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose...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. (Gen. 6:1,4)

These giants were the hybrid offspring of the demons who had mated with human women and they ruled the ancient pre-Flood civilization. Kenneth Grant calls them the Great Old Ones or Ancient Ones. "The 'Grail Blood' and the 'bloodline of the Great Old Ones' are the same thing. They are also the same as the sea-monsters such as Leviathan and Dagon, the 'Lords of the Deep' and gods of the 'Underworld' or Abyss recorded in the legends of every ancient culture." (923) One of these sea monsters was worshipped by the Philistines as Dagon, who apparently survived the Flood, according to Tracy Twyman's article, "Dead But Dreaming: The Great Old Ones of Lovecraftian Legend Reinterpreted as Sumerian/Atlantean Kings."

"...Dagon or Oannes, a half-human, half-fish combination who was known as the 'Lord of the Flood',...was said to rise out of the sea every day to teach his secret knowledge to those who followed him. He is mentioned in Samuel, Chapter 5, when the Philistines capture the Ark of the Covenant and place it in the Temple of Dagon. Two nights later, 'Dagon was fallen upon is face to the ground before the Ark of the Lord; and the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him.' It is this character upon which Satan or Lucifer is based, but the physical description attributed to him applied to an entire race of 'gods', or as they were described in the Bible, Nephilim, or Fallen Angels, the 'Great Old Ones'..." (923)

Twyman is the editor of Dagobert's Revenge Magazine. The Ancient Ones, as Twyman calls them, took the form of dogs, dragons or goats, depending on the star system in the cosmic sea whence they came.

"The Ancient Ones, for their part, seem to be associated both with the Abyss, or underground sea, and with the constellations as well. This is not a contradiction if one takes into account the fact that ancient man considered the sky itself to be a cosmic ocean, and it was often called 'The Abyss' as well. There seem to be three star systems in particular that the Ancient Ones are associated with, which have given birth to what Abdul Alhazred describes as: 'The Cult of the Dog, the Cult of the Dragon, and the Cult of the Goat'...corresponding to the stars Draconis (the Dragon), Sirius (the Dog-Star), and Capricorn, (the Goat), which is oddly based on Enki, the prototype of Satan, whom Abdul is calling an 'Elder God.''" (923)

"As above, so below." Kenneth Grant elucidates the dualistic concept of good and evil in terms of the Hermetic axiom: "the waters beneath the earth that mirror in their uncertain depths the heights of space above the earth wherein glow the stars, the unborn or un-fleshed souls of future states of consciousness, or simply life beyond earth. The mortal world spreads east and west and the land of le invisibles lies above and below it in the vertical dimensions of height and depths, north and south, Horus and Set.' This ties in with the Book of Enoch and the Hosts above and the fallen, banished Nephilim below. This also reminds us of the twins or brother gods in Sumeria called Enki and Enlil. Enki, the infernal of the two, represents Set and Enlil represents Horus" (923)



The Nephilim from the star system Capricorn were giant sea monsters--half-man, half-fish with the horns of a goat--which ruled over the pre-Flood civilization called Atlantis.

"...the Nephilim, who, according to our research, were real flesh-and-blood beings, and ruled as the antediluvian kings of the ancient world over a global kingdom whose capitol was Atlantis. As they were an expert sea-faring people—navigators—they were also depicted as sea gods, half-man, half-fish, and with the horns of a goat.

"H.P. Lovecraft's most quintessential work, 'The Call of Cthulhu'...comes from the Book of Enoch, the Nephilim story in Genesis, and the universal tale of the fall of Atlantis. ...the remains of a high civilization of sea-faring, ocean-obsessed people...is exactly what Atlantis is described as being, and...their kings, or 'gods' were depicted as half-man, half-fish." (923)

According to Dagobert's Revenge, it was Enki (Set or Satan) who sired the Merovingian race; moreover, the head of Capricorn, the Makaru, may be a form of Merovee, progenitor of the Grail kings, who are successive incarnations of the beast out of the cosmic sea:

"The Nephilim were banished to the center of the earth for disobeying God by mating with the daughters of men and teaching them the 'forbidden' arts. In this publication the Nephilim have been identified as the Fathers of the Merovingians...

"...Writing of the Great Old Ones or Elder Gods from Lovecraftian lore, Grant says, 'The letter M, the key vibration of the plane of the Elder Gods, is represented mythologically as the sea-goat, Makaru or as the crocodile, the beast of the waters.' Couldn't Makaru be a form of Merovee who spawned the Merovingians, and was sired himself from a sea-bull? Tracy Twyman has already written of the connections between Lovecraft's Necronomicon Mythos and the Merovingians in her article Dead But Dreaming: The Great Old Ones of Lovecraftian Legend Reinterpreted as Sumerian/Atlantean Kings..." (571)

this must be a kodac moment!! RND has come back in a 'giant' of a way!! Welcome back RND!!! I thought you fell off the face of the Earth. or did you get booted from another site? [:p]



Sorry, you don't like my take on things this time around, but when the O.T. refers to "son's of God," it is talking about angels. Except, according to some, when it come to the Genesis passage. Some also take this passage as confirmation that angels did indeed mate with humans; just because they are not given in marriage does not mean that they lack certain "attributes."

	Quote:
	Jude 1:6 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.

This passage can not be refering to the devil and the 1/3 angels of heaven that left with him since we know that they roam free right now.

I believe that verse in Jude to mean the 1/3 angels, but not Satan.
I have wondered exactly who it is wrecking havoc with Satan here on earth, and have yet
to resolve that issue.
I am guilty of not reading looong posts, and find that a cursory glance was all needed to know that once again RND and I disagree. The angels did indeed have sexual relationship with the daughters here on earth, which brought forth the giants. We don't have to like it RND, but if we are to believe any of the Bible, we must believe it all - it is the mind (thoughts) of Christ!

I am NOT directing my comments towards any one person. I am not saying that one POV is right and the other POV is wrong. This is a general comment about how I pray that myself and others use this forum to glorify God and encourage & edify the body.

Just because we don't always agree doesn't mean that we should harbor ill feelings toward others and an attack (THANK GOD there's been NONE of that here!!!) will not be tolerated. We(I) must all grow at our(my) own rate concerning the things of God and His kingdom and we(I) need to be humbly patient with others(myself) while they(I) grow, just as the more mature are patient with us(me) as we(I) grow. Learning how to express strong beliefs to others in a Christian and non-hurtful and agape manner is an on-going task. This is not to say that we can not express those strong beliefs, but that we should not be hurtful about it and should leave the convicting to the Holy Spirit - we have the job of sowing. This should be a place where all feel secure about talking about their understanding of the things of God and exploring thoughts in a caring manner. I am sure that I will stumble from time to time(edit buttons are good), but it is a worthy standard to strive for and I am thankful that my brethern will forgive me when I do.


On a more pleasant note, I am happy to see RND again , it's been such a long time! What have you been upto RND?

	Goober_JIL wrote:
	this must be a kodac moment!! RND has come back in a 'giant' of a way!! Welcome back RND!!! I thought you fell off the face of the Earth. or did you get booted from another site? [:p]

No, I wasn't booted off another forum...although that usually is my typical pattern. As a matter of fact, I've been trying to stay outta many of these various "Christian" forums.

	Quote:
	Sorry, you don't like my take on things this time around, but when the O.T. refers to "son's of God," it is talking about angels.

Well, to be consistent, wouldn't the same hold true for the N.T.? See Romans 8:14, 1 John 3:1-2. I mean, if a phrase in the is used in the O.T. shouldn't or wouldn't that same phrase have the same meaning in the N.T.

	Quote:
	Except, according to some, when it come to the Genesis passage. Some also take this passage as confirmation that angels did indeed mate with humans; just because they are not given in marriage does not mean that they lack certain "attributes."

Goob, I don't happen to be "one of those" that happen to believe that the phrase "son's of God" is specifically referring to heavenly angelic beings at all, except for the Book of Job. If we are the "children of God the Father" then it only stands to figure that some of us, males presumably, would be referred to as sons.

Hebrews 12:7
If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

	Quote:
	Quote: Jude 1:6 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. This passage can not be refering to the devil and the 1/3 angels of heaven that left with him since we know that they roam free right now.

Goob, where specifically do you read into this passage that angels had relations with humans? I find this verse to be more of a confirmation of what is presented in Revelations 12:9 as opposed to anything else. They angels left, i.e. were kicked out, of their "first estate" the Heavenly Sanctuary, not their "first use." Besides isn't it possible that "first estate" can be similarly used in conjunction with the "Many mansions" used in John 14:2? As a matter of fact if you look at Strong's # 4012 you can see how the word used has a slightly different connotation than what may be inferrenced in the use of "estate" in Jude.

Also, if we can conclude that the serpent in Genesis 3 is indeed Satan then can we further conclude that the war in Heaven had already taken place and that the earth was already populated with fallen angels? And if we can conclude that, why did the fallen angels wait until the earth was further populated to take human women? Were they hedging their bets; waiting for the growth of more choice stock?

	Misfit wrote:
	We don't have to like it RND, but if we are to believe any of the Bible, we must believe it all - it is the mind (thoughts) of Christ!

Sure, I agree with that and as a result I believe ALL of the Bible. What I don't believe is the false interpretation that beings without any reproductive ability, angels in this case (including Satan), had intercourse with human women and made babies.

There is a TV preacher by the name of Arnold Murray that makes this claim as well. I used to watch, even contribute, to his ministry and as a matter of fact that's where I got my Strong's from. But once I was led to the truth and a clearer understanding of what the Bible truly says, then I put off these foolish notions.

Jesus made it abundantly clear that angels don't marry and that in Heaven neither will we. Angels are "created" beings and are "created" by God the Father in Heaven, not on earth. Therefore it stands to reason that their physiological make-up is completely different than humans on earth.

Lastly, one of the major reasons Satan hates us and everything about us and why there is this continum of the "Great Controversy" is that Satan was never granted the priviledge or ability by our Heavenly Father to do the one things humans can and that is procreate.

	Goober_JIL wrote:
	On a more pleasant note, I am happy to see RND again , it's been such a long time! What have you been upto RND?

Not much. Just trying to keep my head above water. Bills are pilling up and the landscape design business is rather slow in my area which has made it very difficult to get ahead and stay there. As a matter of fact, I just finished up on a "new" sign for business: "Will work for food!" J/K

All kidding aside I went to work for a company selling window coverings and blinds and talk about a competitive industry...whew! It was cool they gave me saturday's off, but I knew I was short for the business when the started text messaging about how great busines was going on Saturdays and the like. So I just decided to keep doing what I've been doing and hope for the best. That and I have been involved in a few projects at church such as a new fence project and a new parking lot and landscape and what-y-know, I had time to drop in and say hi.

You can also catch me occaisionally at

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

It's a pretty good web site hosted by a bunch of young up and coming Adventist's.

	RND wrote:
	Goober_JIL wrote: this must be a kodac moment!! RND has come back in a 'giant' of a way!! Welcome back RND!!! I thought you fell off the face of the Earth. or did you get booted from another site? [:p] No, I wasn't booted off another forum...although that usually is my typical pattern. As a matter of fact, I've been trying to stay outta many of these various "Christian" forums.

good to hear that you've not been booted for some time!

	RND wrote:
	Quote: Sorry, you don't like my take on things this time around, but when the O.T. refers to "son's of God," it is talking about angels. Well, to be consistent, wouldn't the same hold true for the N.T.? See Romans 8:14, 1 John 3:1-2. I mean, if a phrase in the is used in the O.T. shouldn't or wouldn't that same phrase have the same meaning in the N.T.

no, we have clear evidence that the term "son's of God" means two totally different things in the two testaments.

RND wrote:

Quote: Except, according to some, when it come to the Genesis passage. Some also take this passage as confirmation that angels did indeed mate with humans; just because they are not given in marriage does not mean that they lack certain "attributes." Goob, I don't happen to be "one of those" that happen to believe that the phrase "son's of God" is specifically referring to heavenly angelic beings at all, except for the Book of Job. If we are the "children of God the Father" then it only stands to figure that some of us, males presumably, would be referred to as sons. Hebrews 12:7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

see above.

RND wrote:

Quote: Quote: Jude 1:6 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. This passage can not be refering to the devil and the 1/3 angels of heaven that left with him since we know that they roam free right now. Goob, where specifically do you read into this passage that angels had relations with humans?

no where, but it informs us that there were two sets of angelic beings that departed from heaven for different reasons/causes; one set sometime between Creation Week and the Fall of Man and the second set once they saw the beauty of the daughters of men.

RND wrote:

I find this verse to be more of a confirmation of what is presented in Revelations 12:9 as opposed to anything else. They angels left, i.e. were kicked out, of their "first estate" the Heavenly Sanctuary, not their "first use." Besides isn't it possible that "first estate" can be similarly used in conjunction with the "Many mansions" used in John 14:2? As a matter of fact if you look at Strong's # 4012 you can see how the word used has a slightly different connotation than what may be inference in the use of "estate" in Jude.

satan and the 1/3 were "cast-out," this second set "left." "Cast-out" connotes an unwilling departure and "left" connotes a willing/voluntary/desired departure.

RND wrote:

Also, if we can conclude that the serpent in Genesis 3 is indeed Satan then can we further conclude that the war in Heaven had already taken place and that the earth was already populated with fallen angels? And if we can conclude that, why did the fallen angels wait until the earth was further populated to take human women? Were they hedging their bets; waiting for the growth of more choice stock?

it seems you're confusing or mixing the two sets of angels; Gen 6 clearly says that once they saw the human women they desired them. Satan was cast-out prior to the fall of man, but after the Creation Week.

RND wrote:

Misfit wrote: We don't have to like it RND, but if we are to believe any of the Bible, we must believe it all - it is the mind (thoughts) of Christ! Sure, I agree with that and as a result I believe ALL of the Bible. What I don't believe is the false interpretation that beings without any reproductive ability, angels in this case (including Satan), had intercourse with human women and made babies. There is a TV preacher by the name of Arnold Murray that makes this claim as well. I used to watch, even contribute, to his ministry and as a matter of fact that's where I got my Strong's from. But once I was led to the truth and a clearer understanding of what the Bible truly says, then I put off these foolish notions. Jesus made it abundantly clear that angels don't marry and that in Heaven neither will we. Angels are "created" beings and are "created" by God the Father in Heaven, not on earth. Therefore it stands to reason that their physiological make-up is completely different than humans on earth. Lastly, one of the major reasons Satan hates us and everything about us and why there is this continum of the "Great Controversy" is that Satan was never granted the priviledge or ability by our Heavenly Father to do the one things humans can and that is procreate.

there are many stories that claim women have been raped by ghosts and IMHO most, if not all ghosts are fallen angels. there is no scripture that states that angels lack reproductive capability; i don't believe that we'll lose our reproductive capability in the everlasting and there is evidence that procreation will be continuing during the 1K reign, the verse only states that they are not given in marriage. IMHO: all angels are male and for them to be given in marriage would endorse the abomination of homosexuality which is at direct odds with the main function of marriage being 1. companionship and 2. procreation, in that order because that is the order given in the Bible. There is an agape reason for no marriage in the everlasting and an adultery reason.

RND wrote:

Goober_JIL wrote: On a more pleasant note, I am happy to see RND again , it's been such a long time! What have you been upto RND? Not much. Just trying to keep my head above water. Bills are pilling up and the landscape design business is rather slow in my area which has made it very difficult to get ahead and stay there. As a matter of fact, I just finished up on a "new" sign for business: "Will work for food!" J/K All kidding aside I went to work for a company selling window coverings and blinds and talk about a competitive industry...whew! It was cool they gave me saturday's off, but I knew I was short for the business when the started text messaging about how great busines was going on Saturdays and the like. So I just decided to keep doing what I've been doing and hope for the best. That and I have been involved in a few projects at church such as a new fence project and a new parking lot and landscape and what-y-know, I had time to drop in and say hi. You can also catch me occaisionally at Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum! It's a pretty good web site hosted by a bunch of young up and coming Adventist's.

your business is covered with a promise

	Quote:
	Deu 15:10 Thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: because that for this thing the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto.

then i'm glad that the blinds thing didn't work out!

i'll added it to the list of "sites/links to review."

	Goober wrote:
	no, we have clear evidence that the term "son's of God" means two totally different things in the two testaments.

And what is that evidence Goob?

	Quote: