As in the days of Noah... ALL flesh had CORRUPTED itself

Although I believe it to be speculative, but I’m of the thought that demons are spirits of the Nephilim. There is a resurrection of the living (children of God) and the dead (unsaved humans to be judged). But the demons are just going to be thrown into the abyss.

There is a passage in Isaiah that some take to support this:
7496. rapha ►
rapha: shades, ghosts

Although I believe it to be speculative, but I’m of the thought that demons are spirits of the Nephilim. There is a resurrection of the living (children of God) and the dead (unsaved humans to be judged). But the demons are just going to be thrown into the abyss.

There is a passage in Isaiah that some take to support this:
7496. rapha ►
rapha: shades, ghosts

The context of Gen 4 makes Gen 6:2 clear.

They that called upon the name of the Lord were calling themselves by the name of the Lord (a marginal note in many KJV bibles) Sons of God. Because the city on the east of Eden was other than them. The sons of men. Theologically.

Cain was thrust out from the presence of the Lord and built a city with a generation of God rejecting wicked people.

Adam and Seth on the West of Eden clung to a theology of a redeemer. And this is where Enoch's prophesy fragment from Jude sheds light. They believed in a coming judge that would execute judgment upon these in Cain's camp that spoke harsh words against him.

Gen 4 also mentions the daughters in Cain's camp, (daughters of men) like Naamah which meant, Fair, Beautiful, as well as a couple of others whose names meant things similar to FAIR, beautiful, pleasant. No mention of Seth's daughters or grand daughters at all.

Gen 6 says that the sons of God (those that called themselves by the name of the Lord from Seth's lineage in Gen 4) saw the daughters of men were FAIR, (those women already mentioned in Cain's camp that were fair in Gen 4) they took them wives of all which they chose (meaning they chose to follow the lusts of their flesh and marry wicked women for the wrong reasons rather than to choose the godly women in their own camp) and this resulted in a falling away (as it always does in the rest of the bible) until only Noah and his family were left.

See how simple the interpretation is without all these elaborate conspiracy theories and imaginative speculations? And that interpretation is straight from what is said in the text.

Also notice that the statement "there were giants (nephilim) in the land in those day" was made before the mention of the children of the sons of God and daughters of men. It says "there were giants in the land in those days. And Also after that..." and mentions that the children of the sons of God and the daughters of men grew up to become mighty men men of renown NOT NEPHILIM which is what the science fiction proponents always try to trick you into thinking that the text says. Don't fall for that old trick.

I too will not argue or debate with those who do not agree with my interpretation on this. I just put it out there for those who may be genuinely confused. To those who are committed to their Angel/Human mating producing giant baby hybrid theories, just scroll on by if you don't appreciate my post.

Do you believe in the MILLENIUM? Premillennialism?

Good analysis, bro. Don't listen to unlearned, unstable opinions which do not take into consideration the Hebrew mindset of composition. The early chapters of Genesis are a Chiasm, contrasting back and forth between those loyal to God vs. those disloyal.

I've asked our confused friends to explain why it is that demons aren't still running around making baby giants today, seeing that there's nothing Scriptural to indicate these "demon spirit/flesh" sexual escapades were halted.

No one has ever indicated angels are still copulating with human women. In fact, people have referred to those particular angels as being in chains since they polluted God's human creation as they did.

You seem to have to make condescending remarks like Scribble does and it reveals your attitude, NOT your biblical understanding

Guess you go on ignore also. I really have little to no tolerance for people who have the smugness you and scribble display

Good analysis, bro. Don't listen to unlearned, unstable opinions which do not take into consideration the Hebrew mindset of composition. The early chapters of Genesis are a Chiasm, contrasting back and forth between those loyal to God vs. those disloyal.

I've asked our confused friends to explain why it is that demons aren't still running around making baby giants today, seeing that there's nothing Scriptural to indicate these "demon spirit/flesh" sexual escapades were halted.

The millennium is bookended by the First and Second Resurrections, and cannot be down here, because Peter says when Jesus comes as a thief in the night, the Earth is going to all but implode. We go up to meet Jesus and go back to His Father's house for the marriage supper of the Lamb and reign for 1,000 years with Him, after which the entire celestial capital city New Jerusalem is transported to it's new home on Earth as the wicked are called for from their graves to stand in judgment, are then sentenced to death, and then cast into the Lake of Fire which is the fire that falls down from God on to the Earth and envelopes the Earth, purifying the entire thing. Then, we get to watch Jesus speak the New Heaven and New Earth into existence "wherein dwelleth righteousness."

No one has ever indicated angels are still copulating with human women. In fact, people have referred to those particular angels as being in chains since they polluted God's human creation as they did.

You seem to have to make condescending remarks like Scribble does and it reveals your attitude, NOT your biblical understanding

Guess you go on ignore also. I really have little to no tolerance for people who have the smugness you and scribble display

But this is not actually about Chuck. It is about what the Bible is stating.

Do you believe in the MILLENIUM? Premillennialism?

I am not sure which you are thinking are trying to manipulate, those who say it means that they begin to call upon the name of the Lord, or those that say it means profane the name of the Lord.

All the best Biblical Textual Experts and Hebrew Scholars (entire committees of scholars who are behind these English translations) The best available in the world, have not concluded that it has negative connotations.

If there was sufficient evidence that it should be negative it would have been decided as such by all of these committees. I have a strong feeling that when I take three years of Hebrew and by then will be able to barely read the original manuscripts for myself I will probably agree with all the following committees behind these translations:

Only one out of these 27 translations thought that profane should be used.

Do I really think that is the correct one over the other 26 (and this is not the full list)? No I do not. I rely on experts for now. Later maybe I can explain why they were right but I doubt I will discover at that time that they were wrong. Very highly unlikely. Don't you think?

I mean if I were to pick the one out of the 27 to prove that it meant (profane the name of the Lord) that would reek of dishonest manipulation to find one that agrees with what I want it to say. I agree with that.

New International Version
Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the name of the LORD.

New Living Translation
When Seth grew up, he had a son and named him Enosh. At that time people first began to worship the LORD by name.

English Standard Version
To Seth also a son was born, and he called his name Enosh. At that time people began to call upon the name of the LORD.

Berean Study Bible
And to Seth also a son was born, and he called him Enosh. At that time men began to call upon the name of the LORD.

King James Bible
And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

New King James Version
And as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on the name of the LORD.

New American Standard Bible
To Seth also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. Then people began to call upon the name of the LORD.

NASB 1995
To Seth, to him also a son was born; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call upon the name of the LORD.

NASB 1977
And to Seth, to him also a son was born; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call upon the name of the LORD.

Amplified Bible
To Seth, also, a son was born, whom he named Enosh (mortal man, mankind). At that [same] time men began to call on the name of the LORD [in worship through prayer, praise, and thanksgiving].

Christian Standard Bible
A son was born to Seth also, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the name of the LORD.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
A son was born to Seth also, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the name of Yahweh.

American Standard Version
And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enosh. Then began men to call upon the name of Jehovah.

Brenton Septuagint Translation
And Seth had a son, and he called his name Enos: he hoped to call on the name of the Lord God.

Contemporary English Version
Later, Seth had a son and named him Enosh. About this time people started worshiping the LORD.

Douay-Rheims Bible
But to Seth also was born a son, whom he called Enos; this man began to call upon the name of the Lord.

English Revised Version
And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enosh: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

Good News Translation
Seth had a son whom he named Enosh. It was then that people began using the LORD's holy name in worship.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
A son was also born to Seth, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to worship the LORD.

International Standard Version
Seth also fathered a son, whom he named Enosh. At that time, profaning the name of the LORD began.

JPS Tanakh 1917
And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enosh; then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

Literal Standard Version
And to Seth, to him also a son has been born, and he calls his name Enos; then a beginning was made of preaching in the Name of YHWH.

NET Bible
And a son was also born to Seth, whom he named Enosh. At that time people began to worship the LORD.

New Heart English Bible
And a son was also born to Seth, and he named him Enosh. This one began to call on the LORD's name.

World English Bible
There was also born a son to Seth, and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on Yahweh's name.

Young's Literal Translation
And to Seth, to him also a son hath been born, and he calleth his name Enos; then a beginning was made of preaching in the name of Jehovah.

You could be right about the Nephilim. As one excellent Bible expositor once put it (not naming names here because I don't need a bunch of self congratulatory self righteous bigots to try and discredit someone that could walk circles around them in their finest hour of blowhard twisting), angels are not the sniveling things that demons appear to be. Demons seek to enter a living flesh and blood body to do their handiwork or at the least, a listening and itchy ear to do their bidding.

Angels do not fit that caliber of spirit being, even if fallen.

777 is a 7th Day Adventist, Research Their Beliefs

No one has ever indicated angels are still copulating with human women. In fact, people have referred to those particular angels as being in chains since they polluted God's human creation as they did.

You seem to have to make condescending remarks like Scribble does and it reveals your attitude, NOT your biblical understanding

Guess you go on ignore also. I really have little to no tolerance for people who have the smugness you and scribble display

I'm not seeing what your saying,,,, the Sons of God(Seth's children) married into Cains family and they were not suppose to because something was passed down genetically from Cain into his offspring?

Smugness, Put On Ignore?

You call "Scribe" scribble?

You arent gonna be the dictator using the playground bully tactics, on a simple difference of opinion.

It's my opinion your eschatology is way out in left field, but I'm not putting you on ignore, nor misrepresenting your username

Isn't if funny how the snowflakes among us don't even realize their use of the "ignore" option only serves to expose them as the immature children they are?

Think about it: there are already rules against harassment, so the reason for the "ignore" button is not to insulate themselves from actual abuse, but from the "abuse of difference of opinion", the hallmark of snowflake mentality.

I always say if you gotta circle your intellectual wagons around your ideas to protect them from scrutiny, it's time to abandon them and get some new ones.

i read what you right and ignore you.

works based self-righteousness , keeping the jewish Sabbath, have nothing to do with salvation through faith in Christ, and should be ignored.

Good analysis, bro. Don't listen to unlearned, unstable opinions which do not take into consideration the Hebrew mindset of composition. The early chapters of Genesis are a Chiasm, contrasting back and forth between those loyal to God vs. those disloyal.

I've asked our confused friends to explain why it is that demons aren't still running around making baby giants today, seeing that there's nothing Scriptural to indicate these "demon spirit/flesh" sexual escapades were halted.