Great Sermon! 1 corinthians 11 9-10 is also an important verse to discuss. It's making it clear that woman was made for man and not angels and therefore women are to wear their hair long as a sign of this. If there wasn't a chance of women and angels mingling then why this clarification in Corinthians?
Great Sermon! The very title indiscriminately implied this was going to be a KJB comparison, and sure enough, as we've come to expect it turned into another KJB bashing session. It would be great to make this official and actually invite a gust speaker from the so called "kjv only" camp to offer salt and light to the lack of understanding from people who are not "kjv only". Sam Gipp would be a fantastic guest for you guys to invite on the show, please check into doing so, it would be amazing and wonderful to see if a fellowship could even be achieved by the Berean's in your studio with the "kjv only" camp. :-)
pt 3 Why wouldn't these demigod/mutant/hybridsapiens be found in the lineage of Jesus, to muck up the humanity of the Messianic hope? There are some who believe that was why the flood was needed (i.e., to keep Noah's human bloodine pure for Jesus). What if you are born of a person who was possessed and you're part angle? Seriously! On one hand your human parent is part of the corporately condemned in Adam, given many chances for salvation, and still saved even after you fall into sin. Meanwhile, the rest of your DNA is that of an inhuman kind that starts out with God's grace, but will lose it forever with no hope of redemption and be judged by the elect humans.Â Would you be judged as a human or an angel? Did Christ die for them?Â
When we see demons begging to be cast into pigs it seems that they need a body to posses if they hope to engage physically upon the earth, but it does not seem like they can make themselves a body to use et al.Â
Anyway, I said that to say this: You have to overlook a lot more Scripture to presume Peter and Jude thought Gen 6 was about angels without calling anyone angles in Hebrew. It looks more like these particular sons of God belong to the line of humans after Seth.
Sorry, but that was a long dialog and with 3 opinions to be addressed.
part 2 Do spirits have flesh and bone?Â Not as Jesus puts it in Luke 24:39, and if they somehow did have such bodies demons could pull off a faux resurrection and turn our Lord's resurrection into a pyrrich victory.
Do spirits have creative power, have DNA, or create seed, (and can they even reproduce after there own kind)?Â Not according to Col. 1, Heb. 1, and John 1. That sovereignty belongs to Jesus.
Can anything reproduce anything not after its own kind? Not according to Gen 1.
Are we confident angels won't do this breeding today?Â
Can a possessed man produce offspring such as the nephilim or a giants? Something often assumed by readers of Gen 6.
Were nephilim around during the mixed breeding or just a result of it? The text says that the fallen ones, whomever they are, were on the earth at that time and after, but it doesn't say they were the offspring of the sons of God and daughters of men, per se. The nephilim were possibly another demographic all together and were on the earth as well as the parties called the sons of God and the daughter of men like any other demographic.
Great Sermon! Aren't Gen 4, 5 & 6 supposed to be read together? If we ignore the unnatural chapter breaks we can see the mention of those calling on the name of the Lord. What are people whom worship God, namely the people of Israel, called by in Hosea 1? Sons of God.
It's a little off the topic, but why did you three abandon the part that Jude wrote about the unbelieving Egyptians (along with the angles and people of Sodom) as examples of "these" in hell?Â All of whom defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries according to the following verse.Â
Not that far off the topic is that we know, in the overall context of Scripture, Satan was not alone in abandoning God, so we cannot assume all the angles fell in Genesis 6 and/or that these are the only ones referred to by Peter or Jude.
Why was God only grieved over humans in Gen 6 and not grieved over the angelic kind being they are fallen ones (no pun intended by that being a literal translation for nephilim)? Seems like it's assuming they are angels when they're are not angelic.
At the heart of the topic we have to ask ourselves a few questions...
Parallels Isn't Genesis 6:1-5 a summary and consequence of Cain's wanderings in Nod in Genesis 4:13-24? Cain was driven out "from the presence of the LORD" and "knew his wife." Cain is referenced in 1John 3:12 as a child of the devil (much like the Jews in John 8). Cain's wife must be one of the "daughters of man" (literally daughters of ADAM possibly through Seth). Cain's son Enoch built a city (which may have been the earth's first city). Cain's great great great grandson Lamech may have been the first to practice polygamy and made a "gangsta" rap song touting his murderous exploits. One of his wives bore a son (Jabal) who was the first to be a tent dwelling cattle herder. His brother (Jubal) was an inventor and player of musical instruments. Lamech's other wife bore a son (Tubalcain) who was the first metallurgist.
The point is that all of these offspring are evil geniuses; "mighty men" of "renown." Today we would call such men "giants" (Genesis 6:4). One of the Hebrew definitions of Nephilim is "bully" which would certainly fit Cain's line. Imagine the ancient world populated by a majority of evil geniuses whose thoughts of their "hearts "evil continuously." If only 3 evil spirit-filled men will control the world in the end times (Rev 16:13-14) imagine the world in Noah's day!
Why not now? if Angels and humans had children in the past why don't we see it happening after that? Was it only a special kind of angel that no longer roams the earth? Did God neuter the Angels after this episode?
Sadly, I think this is just one of those topics we will never fully understand and because of that it can just get weird.
Great Sermon! Both Scofield and John MacArthur interprets Matt 16:28 refers to Matt 17:1-2. MacArthur translate "kingdom" to mean "royal splendor". If this is correct, and Christ is saying in Matthew "Son of man coming in his royal splendor". And in Mark and Luke, Christ is saying "until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power in Mark or as in Luke "until they see the kingdom of God. It seems to me but anyone can exegete Matt 16:28, they have to be reconcile Mark and Luke? I will be listening to your teaching on Wed.
Great Sermon! I previously posted a question on Matt 17 about after 6 days or on or about 8 days (Luke). After thinking about it, I think I understand, after 6 days could mean 7 or 8 and on or about 8 could mean 7 or 8. Just proves further that this was Spirit inspired writing of 4 individuals, they didnt copy each other or compared notes.
Great Discussion Just add another thought to your News in Focus discussion, if I may. Taking verses out of context or applying them where they dont apply, is not this where rightly dividing the word of God applies. 2 Peter 3:9 is always the first one I think of.
Some are doing it right Found this interesting:
Rick Warren â€“ Saddleback Church
Has made tens of millions off his book sales (it could be in the hundreds). Howeverâ€¦ Warrenhas made so much money that in 2005 he repaid all of his 25 years of salary to the church & stopped taking any new salary. He and his wife give away 91% of their income to charity. Rick is the only one doing it right â€“ in my opinion.
Great Sermon! But, the question remains, where and who are the 10 lost tribes (lost to us but not to God). If you interpret scripture literally, where it is plain teaching, then Ezekiel clearly states the regathering of ALL 12 tribes (future). So they are out there. But, if you believe on replacement/covenant theology, they do not exist anymore.
Combatting the black helicoptors Thoroughly enjoyed the discussion. Some of the things evangelicals are willing to swallow still amazes me. Willing to take their theology from a heretic instead of digging through the Word of God and measuring their ideas against proven orthodox doctrine and men of God. Thank you gentlemen for dismantling this absurd notion.