Who are the NEPHILIM in Genesis 6
- Thread starter Major
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
all sin man does is to a man unless it is what God said HE sees as a sin to HIM, very simple. Sin offends God sin is disobedience to Him.
Yet the ability to sin doesn't mean angels can remove the natural order of God where HE has established each after its own kind.
two early men can do what is sin yet, an angel and woman cannot do what God did not make them to do. it has never happened cat do not make dogs, fish do not make whales,and angels do not sleep with women.
We have something better than they.
Were the OT saints at the time of their death:
1. absent from the body and present with the Lord
2. washed in the blood of Jesus
3. part of the body of Christ
4. sealed by the Holy Spirit
5. born again
6. made a new creature in Christ
I'd ask for a verse to back up your claim, but I know such a one does not exist...
Show me a female angel in the Bible...
Hey, listen, you are the one who claimed angels are all male and don't marry for that reason. The onus is on you to provide a verse to prove your claim, but as I said? I know no such verse exists. Nice try, though. Better luck next time
Are there angels that are men? Can men reproduce? Are these angels men?
Luke 24
3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
Hey, listen, you are the one who claimed angels are all male and don't marry for that reason. The onus is on you to provide a verse to prove your claim, but as I said? I know no such verse exists. Nice try, though. Better luck next time
Do you really want me to post all verses where a male angel appeared? You know I will...
Im just asking for one female angel verse.
See post 188.
No, no need to post names that could be either male or female for all we know, as that would prove absolutely nothing, nor posting verses where angels were said to be male. I never said there were female angels mentioned, so why hammer on me about it? Please provide the (non-existent) verse claiming all angels are male and don't marry for that reason. The onus is on you to prove your claim. I know you can't do it. Trying to turn the tables won't work. Or just admit it is an assumption you have made... especially the marriage part
No, no need to post names that could be either male or female for all we know, as that would prove absolutely nothing, nor posting verses where angels were said to be male. I never said there were female angels mentioned, so why hammer on me about it? Please provide the (non-existent) verse claiming all angels are male and don't marry for that reason. The onus is on you to prove your claim. I know you can't do it. Trying to turn the tables won't work. Or just admit it is an assumption you have made... especially the marriage part
The woman is to keep charge of her hair accordingly because the woman is for man. Angels are attracted to those women who rebel.
6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.
9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
Angels are always male. But there has been a lot of visual misrepresentation of angels.
It is you that has zero scripture for your opinion. The bible never says angels are a-sexual. They are called men, look like human males, and are said to have impregnated human females, Gen 6.
That is an assumption. I would be more inclined to say they are
neither male nor female. But men often like to presume dominance.
When people saw angels, they saw them as males and they looked human. Females were created for reproduction for this age only, something the angels of God have no need for which is why there are no female angels.
I was wondering if anyone would spot the usage of the word "age" in what Jesus said https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/20.htm
Regardless of how you want to present it, Jude is quoting a prophecy from what was said by Enoch. And it is from Enoch as being a part of the scriptures, that Jude got the prophecy from. God obviously had His stamp of approval regarding Jude's quote of Enoch, because it is in His word. Not to mention that there is much in the writings of Enoch that supports the other scriptures regarding the sons of God who took human women as wives who bore the Nephilim and all that those angels taught mankind and thereby corrupting, as well as a better understanding of why the flood took place. In addition Michael and Gabriel are mentioned, as well as Noah, as the son of Lamech and how he might escape the flood. What is also mentioned is what both Peter and Jude wrote regarding those angels that were cast down into Tartartus, most likely referring to those angels who took wives. Therefore, Enoch enhances the information that is found in the Bible. True, some of the things that is written in Enoch seems strange and confusing, but we have to remember that the information is regarding what took place after God took him and his travels with the angels regarding all that he saw and experienced.
I personally believe in the writings of Enoch and also feel the confirmation of the Spirit. However, if anyone does not want to recognize the writings of Enoch, which were once a part of the scriptures, then they are free to their opinion, but I will not change mine.
This is fascinating to me from the point of the different positions in eschatology but as you read the first three verses of 1 Enoch would you consider it to be pre-trib.,,,post-trib preterist Amil. ect.? https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe004.htm Why I'm asking is that if he says it is written for a remote generation who will be present during the tribulation then which position does it support and which will it harm?
Greetings imasoandso!
I don't think that it has anything to do with the pre, mid and post interpretations of when the church will be gathered. Compare the following from Daniel and Revelation:
"He will speak out against the Most High and oppress the saints of the Most High, intending to change the appointed times and laws; and the saints will be given into his hand for a time, and times, and half a time."
"The beast was given a mouth to speak arrogant and blasphemous words, and authority to act for 42 months. And the beast opened its mouth to speak blasphemies against God and to slander His name and His tabernacle—those who dwell in heaven. Then the beast was permitted to wage war against the saints and to conquer them, and it was given authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation."
Both Daniel and Revelation are speaking about those saints who will come out of the great tribulation. This is supported by the fact that both scriptures are referring to that last 3 1/2 years of the seven year period as 'a time, times and half a time' and as '42 months.'
I have posted this many times and will post it here again: Throughout chapters 1 thru 3 of Revelation, the word 'ekklesia' translated as 'church' is used 19 time and that with not being used interchangeably with the word 'hagios' translated as 'saints.' Then after the end of chapter 3, the word 'ekklesia/church' is never used again until Revelation 22:16. After that, the word 'hagios/saints' is used. The fact that the word 'church' was used exclusively throughout the first three chapters and then disappears should be a red flag for everyone who studies Revelation. In other words, the exclusive use of the word 'church' and then its abrupt absence should get our attention. It's not a coincidence.
As previously stated, the last time the word 'ekklesia/church' is used is at the very end of chapter 3 of the last letter to the seven churches, the letters representing the 'what is now,' i.e. representing the entire church period. Following that in Revelation 4:1, you have John hearing the Lord's voice which is described as sounding like a trumpet, which is also significant, i.e. it's another clue. This voice that sounds like a trumpet says "come up here and I will show you what must take place after this." After what? The letters represent the 'church period and so the 'what must take place later' would take place after the 'what is now' i.e. what takes place after the church period. This is why the word 'ekklesia/church' does not appear and is never used during the time of the narrative of God's wrath. The use of the word 'hagios/saints' is in reference to that great number of white robed saints which no man can count from every nation, people, tribe and language, making them Gentiles. These are those who will become believers after the church has been removed in Revelation 4:1, which I believe is a prophetic allusion to where the church is gathered in the chronology of Revelation, which would be prior to the first seal being opened in chapter 6.
Now to answer your question, I believe that it is these saints introduced in Revelation 7:9-17, who will become believers in Christ after the church has been removed, will be on the earth along with the remnant of Israel during that seven years and will be under attack from the beast during the last 3 1/2 years of that seven year period. Therefore, this does not have anything to do with the pre, mid or post gathering of the church, but with those people who will become believers after the church has been removed.
Always keep in mind and apply the fact, that Jesus already took upon himself the wrath of God that every believer deserves, satisfying it completely. And therefore, God's wrath no longer rests upon the believer and therefore must be removed prior to God's wrath, which is initiated by the opening of the first seal. The individuals who currently belong to the church have been credited with the righteousness of Christ and have been reconciled to God. Taking into consideration the severity and magnitude of God's wrath and that it is going to come upon the whole inhabited world, then the church must be removed prior to the on-set of said wrath. It just so happens that this group will become believers after the church has been removed and which I am sure was also God ordained. This is why Jesus warns us to always be watching and ready for His appearing to come for us. Otherwise, anyone who has gone back into the world and is again living according to the sinful nature, will be like one of those virgins whose lamps have gone out without having any extra oil and that day will close on them like a trap.