you This message is continued from part one, Enoch and Jasher, Frauds and Fictions. We would urge you to listen to the entire two-part message. I want to repeat that anyone who relies upon the alleged book of Enoch, which is a book of fantasy, fiction, fabrication, and heresy, does so to his own shame and embarrassment. However, what does the Bible say? What does the Bible say about Genesis chapter 6? Genesis 6, verse 1. It says, And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them. But the sons of God saw that the daughters of men and they were fair. They took them wives of all which they chose. The Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, but he is also flesh. Yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. Verse 4 says, 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. Verse 5, And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. The Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from off the face of the earth. both man and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air, for it repenteth me that I have made them. But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations and walked with God. So again, there are two opposing views of how this passage should be interpreted. There are variants, of course, within those views, but in general, one view says that the sons of God in this passage are in fact angelic beings who abducted and made it in a physical union with human women and produced monstrous offspring that we call the Nephilim. And it was for that cause, then, that God brought the judgment of the flood in Noah's day. And the other view holds that the sons of God in this passage are the godly line of Seth, who intermarried with the ungodly line of Cain, and corrupted themselves thereby, going into idolatry, apostasy, and gross sin. And it was the sin of men, again, rather than the sin of angels and fallen angelic beings, that brought the judgment of the flood. So again, I take the position, and I believe for good reason, I don't believe in heresy, that the sons of God, in this passage in Genesis 6 verse 4, are not angels. There's a few reasons for that. Number one, is that the angels are not physically or anatomically capable of mating with human women to produce offspring. They're spirit beings, not physical beings. Matthew 22, verse 30. When in resurrection they neither marry nor are given to marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Mark chapter 12, verse 24. Luke 20, verse 35. In Hebrews chapter 2, verse 16, it says of Christ, For verily he took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham. So I would say that Jesus took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham. The reason is because angels and humans have different natures. They have different types of bodies, one celestial and one terrestrial. I listened to a few messages posted online by a good preacher, one preacher of the fallen angels' position, who made much of the fact that Jesus was referring here to angels while they remained in heaven, before they left their first estate and their own habitation, as we read about in Jude 1, verse 7. But he says that, as many do, having left their first estate, they were somehow all of a sudden able to unite sexually with human women. That same preacher made much of the difference between celestial bodies occupied by angels and the terrestrial bodies occupied by the daughters of men. As we read in 1 Corinthians 15, verse 39, all flesh is not of the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another of flesh of beasts, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, which I presume include angels, and bodies terrestrial. but the glory of the celestial is one, the glory of the terrestrial is another. He quoted that verse and talked a lot about it, but then the same preacher, whom, by the way, I respect and agree with on most subjects, failed to explain when or how these angels, after they left their first estate, came to acquire a terrestrial body instead of their celestial body, capable of mating with daughters of men and producing offspring. He, by the way, also turned, please, to Hebrews chapter 1. He also failed to mention one time in any of three messages on this subject. Failed to bring up this passage, very important passage on this particular subject. Hebrews chapter 1. First we read in verse 5. Under which of the angels said he at any time, thou art my son? Verse 7. And of the angels he saith, and maketh his angel spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. But unto his son he saith, thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever. Verse 14, are they not ministering spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? Verse 7 says, who make in his angels spirits. This minister is a flame of fire. Verse 14 says, are not they all ministering spirits? Angels are spiritual beings. They are spirit beings. They are not physical beings. They are created spirit beings who did not create themselves, by the way, and are not able to recreate themselves or transform themselves or change their bodies from celestial to terrestrial so they can then mate with humans. So they're not anatomically capable. But Genesis 3.15 says the devil has seed. Yes, the devil has seed. But since he's a spiritual being, he can only have a spiritual seed, not physical. That's why the Lord Jesus said in John chapter 8 to the Pharisees, He said, ye are of your father, the devil. Yes, Satan has seed, but it's spiritual seed. Genesis 3.15 refers to the spiritual enmity or warfare that would continue throughout the present era between the children of God and the children of the devil. It's not referring to Satan mating with Eve and producing Cain. This wicked, heretical serpent seed doctrine and it spun off into all kinds of other heresies in the Pentecostal movement, identity movement, all these racist movements. That serpent seed doctrine is a damnable heresy. So then what does Jude mean in verse 6 of his epistle when he says that these angels who sinned left their first estate? Jude says in verse 6 of his epistle, 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 that great day." What does that mean? My response is that leaving their first estate does not mean that they transformed their bodies from celestial to terrestrial or from heavenly to earthly. They don't have power to do that. They're created beings. They can't do that. It doesn't mean that they acquired for themselves a physical anatomy that enabled them to mate with human women. It simply means that they joined with Satan in his rebellion against God. Very simple. That's why Jesus said hell was prepared for the devil and his angels. That's why it says in Revelation 12, verse 7, There was war in heaven, Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels, it says in verse 9 of that chapter, and the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent called the devil, and Satan was deceived with the whole world, He was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. They left their first estate, that's all that means. Yes, Satan has seed, but it's spiritual, because he's a spirit being. He's not a physical being. Angels cannot mate with women. My second argument is that the text itself does not support the view that the sons of God in Genesis 6-4 are angels, back to verse 4 of chapter 6. 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 unto them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. Later in the book, the writer, which is Moses, uses actually the term angels, to refer to angels. In Genesis 19.1, 19.15, 28.12, and 32.1. If he intended angels in this passage, there's no reason he wouldn't have used the term angels. He had the word to use, he knew the word, had it at his disposal. He didn't use that word. I want to say also that this verse does not say that the children born of this union were giants. Notice the semicolon. There were giants in the earth in those days. And also after that. And also after that. There is a distinction in this verse, if you'll look, between the giants and the mighty men, the men of renown. The giants were in the earth both before and after this union between the sons of God and the daughters of men. The giants are not the product of that union. The product of that union, on the other hand, are the mighty men, the men of renown, as distinct from the giants. Mighty men refers to to the great extent of the person's or the people's abilities in combat or power. There are many places where the Bible refers to mighty men, none of which would indicate that they were the offspring of a supposed union of angels and people. Samson was a mighty man of valor. Judges 6 verse 12. Israelite warriors were called mighty men of valor in Joshua and elsewhere. David had his mighty men in his army. They were mighty men. Boaz was called a mighty man of wealth in Ruth chapter 2. All these examples use the same Hebrew word that is used here. And there is no reason to conclude many occurrences of this were that any mighty men were not men, but they were actually half-breed giants. That's not the meaning of the word. Men of renown simply means men who were famous. They made a name for themselves. In fact many places, 865 times this word is just translated name. It just means made a name for themselves. It doesn't convey any idea of supernatural power or strength or demonic presence or anything like that. There is no reason to conclude that men of renown were not just men or that they were half-breed giants. I want to say also that Genesis 6 makes it very clear the reason for the judgment of the flood was not the sin of angels in mating with human women as the theory goes. the reason for the flood, the judgment of the flood, was clearly the sin of men. Verse 5, God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth. And it grieved him at his heart. Nowhere does it say that God was grieved for making the angels. who grieved him that he had made man on the earth. If the Nephilim theory was correct, if fallen angels somehow took captive daughters of men by force and force-mated with them in a satanic conspiracy to corrupt the bloodline of the Messiah, as the theory goes, then the culprits here who deserve judgment were the fallen angels, not the daughters of men. But the text clearly states that the reason for the judgment of God in the flood of Noah was not the sins of fallen angels. Verse 5 says, God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, that every imagination of his thoughts, or the thoughts of his heart, was only evil continually. And he repented to the Lord that he had made man on the earth. Turn over to Genesis chapter 8, verse 21. God repeats that after the flood. Verse 21 of Genesis 8. And the Lord smelled a sweet savor. The Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground anymore for man's sake, for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth. He repeated the reason that he sent that flood, and that was that the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth. By the way, we still have that same problem. The flood was a general judgment against a universal corruption of the heart of mankind that resulted from the fall of man in Genesis chapter 3, not from a distorted mutation spawned by angel-human relations. That's not why he sent the flood. Mankind has not changed. His thoughts are still evil from his youth, by the way. And there is another judgment coming, but this time it's going to be by fire and not by water. God will keep His promise. And I want to point out another reason from the text of Genesis 6 that really militates against the sons of God being fallen angels. In verse 1 of Genesis 6, it says, And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them. But the sons of God saw that the daughters were men, and they were fair. They took them wives of all which they chose. I need to point out that this phrase, they took them wives, does not support the Nephilim theory that fallen angels took daughters of men captive by force to mate with them. The phrase, they took them, wives, is a common phrase used throughout the Old Testament in many places. We're just referring to common marriage. Genesis 25, verse 20 says, Isaac was 40 years old when he took Rebekah to wife. That means he formed a marriage covenant with Rebekah. He took her to wife, he married her. How did Isaac take Rebecca to life? It wasn't by force, it wasn't by abducting her. If you recall the story, actually, Abraham sent his servant to fetch Isaac a bride from among his family back east. Because he didn't want Isaac to take a bride from among the Canaanites. And it's actually a beautiful story. Some believe it's actually a picture of the Holy Spirit calling out the bride of Christ during the church age. But in that story, Abraham's servant actually met with Rebekah's family, told them why he'd been sent, and Rebekah's family gave her the choice, by the way, and she chose willingly to go back with the servant to become Isaac's bride, and so he took her to wife. He didn't abduct her. She went by her own choice to marry him for life. They had a marriage covenant. Genesis 26, verse 34 says Esau was 40 years old when he took to wife Judith. the daughter of Beri the Hittite. It's a common phrase, meaning they married each other. Exodus 2 verse 1, the Bible says, And there went a man out of the house of Levi, and took to wife a daughter of Levi. Exodus 6 verse 23, Aaron took him Elisheba, daughter of Amenadab, sister of Nashon, to wife. He took her to wife. He didn't kidnap her. He didn't take her captive. He probably talked to her father and said, Can I marry your daughter? and they formed a marriage covenant. The phrase is used throughout the Old Testament. Many other examples. The New Testament as well, by the way. Please turn to Luke chapter 20. I'm going to start in verse 27. Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which denied that there was any resurrection, which is why they were sad, you see. They asked him, saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, his brother should take his wife, That phrase, take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. There were therefore seven brethren. And the first took a wife. Now he didn't kidnap her and force her. He took a wife and raised up seed unto his brother. And there were therefore seven brethren. And the first took a wife, there's that phrase, and died without children. The second took her to wife, and he died childless. And the third took, you get the point. That phrase, took her to wife, is a common phrase used of marriage. Last of all, the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection, whose wife of them is she? or seven had her to wife. See, this story has a couple of applications to the whole issue of the sons of God in Genesis chapter 6. And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage. But they which shall be counted worthy to attain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage. In other words, angels don't take human women to wife. Now this account says two things on this topic. Number one, it says angels do not take humans to wife. Also it says the phrase that they took them wives of all they chose in Genesis 6-4 does not mean that they took the daughters of men by force. So that definitely, I wanted to point that out. The passage does not, the text of the passage back in Genesis chapter 6 does not support this view. that taking wives was somehow taking captive by force these silly women who they used then to corrupt the bloodline of humanity. That's not supported by the text. It means that they took them in marriage. It means that what was once the godly line of Seth, I do believe, the children of God, intermarried and became unequally yoked with the ungodly children of the devil. They committed a sin that was actually strictly forbidden in the law of Moses, and a sin that is actually also strictly forbidden to Christians in the New Testament era. It was a sin that destroyed Solomon. It was a sin that led Israel into idolatry and sent them into captivity, and that may have actually destroyed Israel again even if they came out of the captivity out of Babylon had they not repented of it, of intermarrying with the pagans around them. Genesis 6 does describe a great apostasy, a day when the descendants of Seth, those who were once a godly generation who were called by the name of the Lord, who had once separated themselves from the ungodly line of Cain, chose after several generations to do just as the Israelites did, by the way, even after they returned from captivity in Babylon, to intermarry, to unite themselves in marriage covenants with the ungodly descendants of Cain, who had, by the way, long before that day gone into rebellion and idolatry. Genesis chapter 4. Back to Genesis chapter 4, verse 16. It says, And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived, and bare Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of that city after the name of his son, Enoch. Verse 25 then says, Adam knew his wife again, and she bare a son, and called his name Seth. For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. Then verse 26 says, And to Seth Him also there was born a son, and he called his name Enos. Then the Bible says, Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord. I want to tell you that that sentence structure could also be translated, Then men began to be called by the name of the Lord. I'm going to quote a little bit from Gil's commentary. I've done that before. At least I know where Gil's commentary came from. I know who Gil was. He has some good insights into the Old Testament. He did a lot of study. of the rabbinic writings in Hebrew, he's a great Hebrew scholar. Gill writes, then men began to call upon the name of the Lord. Not but that Adam and Abel and all good men had called upon the name of the Lord and prayed to him before or worshipped him before this time personally and in their families. But now the families of good men being larger and more numerous, they joined together in social and public worship. seeing the Canaanites incorporating themselves and joining families together and building cities and carrying on their civil and religious affairs among themselves, they also formed themselves into distinct bodies, not only separated from them, but called themselves by a different name, for so the words may be rendered. Then began men to call themselves, or to be called by the name of the Lord. The sons of God, writes Gil, as distinct from the sons of men, which distinction may be observed in Genesis 6 verse 2, So what Gil is saying is that they took upon themselves the name of the sons of God. They were called by the name of the Lord, in other words. The reason for the judgment of the flood was not the sin of angels in mating with human women, as the theory goes. The reason for the judgment of the flood was clearly the sin of men. God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth. That every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. The once godly line of Seth, whom chapter 4 of Genesis says had once called upon the name of the Lord, which also means that they were called by and who called themselves by the name of the Lord, who gathered together in public worship, had corrupted themselves and apostatized and intermarried with the ungodly and unbelieving line of Cain that they had previously separated themselves from. to the point where the entire race of humanity had completely abandoned and rejected God's laws and precepts, except for Noah and his family. And that's why God sent the judgment of the flood, because of the wickedness of man, not that of angels. That's number two. Number three, God does not call angels sons. In fact, Hebrews chapter 1, Hebrews 1 verse 1, God who at sundry times and in diverse manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds, who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high, being made so much better than the angels. That means appointed to be. He was appointed to be so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. Verse 5. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee, and again I'll be unto him a father, and he shall be unto me a son. The answer demanded by the question is none. And I believe this verse plainly says that God never called an angel a son. To which of the angels said he at any time? That means at no time did God say to any angel, Thou art my son. Ted made a very good point, and that was that we shouldn't stop the quote in the middle of that verse. For unto which the eagle said, Ye at any time, thou art my son. The verse goes on to say, This day have I begotten thee. This verse is a reference to Christ, who is, in fact, the only begotten Son of God. We read in John 1, 14 and 18, and also in John 3, 16 and 18. Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. So that's a clear reference to the Lord Jesus. This, of course, we know the context. Hebrews 1 is talking about the superiority of Christ, in this case to the angels. Having said that, I would still say that God does not call angels sons, and that we as adopted sons and co-heirs with Christ are raised up together with Christ, Paul says in Ephesians chapter 2. Ephesians chapter 2, you need to look there, verse 1 through 6. Paul says that we are made to sit together in heavenly places with Christ Jesus in a place and position, by the way, that angels do not share. First look at the rest of this verse in Hebrews chapter 1. For unto which the angel said ye at any time, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee. We can't stop it there either. We have to read on. And again, I'll be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. Nowhere does the Bible specifically say that God will be to the angels a father, and that they shall be to him sons. But it does say that about us, as we know in many places. Many places it says that about us. Over and over, Jesus taught his disciples to call his father their father. To pray to the father in his name. Paul says in Romans 8, verse 15, For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. We don't read that of angels in the Bible anywhere. Galatians 4, verse 6, Paul writes, And because ye are sons, God has sent forth the spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. We've been raised up with Christ. to sit in heavenly places with Him, positionally. And that happened when we got saved. And so we actually have a position the angels do not share. So back to Luke chapter 20, verse 35. But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead. Wait till you're all there. Back to Luke chapter 20, verse 35. But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither married nor are given in marriage, neither can they die anymore, for they are equal unto the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. The they here in verse 36 are those whom Christ has redeemed by his blood from humanity, those Jesus said, "...which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world and the resurrection from the dead." Angels do not experience resurrection from the dead. He says, "...neither can they die any more, for they are equal unto the angels." And you can insert, "...and they that are redeemed from among men are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." Again, angels are not the children of the resurrection. They do not take part in the resurrection. I would say it's not a stretch, I believe, to say that the children of God, here in Luke 20, verse 36, are the redeemed of the human race, not the angels. So the argument is made, but it says they're equal. It says they're equal. I would respond, again, that they are definitely equal in some respects. Actually, in those respects mentioned here by the Lord Jesus. But they neither marry nor are given a marriage, neither can they die anymore. But in other respects, they are not equal. Turn to 1 Corinthians 6, please. 1 Corinthians 6. The sons of God in the resurrection are not equal to angels, aside from the fact that they have eternal life. Verse 1, 1 Corinthians 6. Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? It doesn't say that of angels, by the way. And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Look at that next verse. Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life. You see, being co-heirs with Christ, being raised up to sit with Christ in heavenly places, as Paul says in Ephesians chapter 2, means that we will rule and reign with Him, as it says in Revelation chapter 20, Revelation chapter 5. It means that we will judge both the world and the angels with Him. Hebrews chapter 2 verse 5. Hebrews chapter 2. Please turn there. See, we don't share an equal place with angels in the resurrection. We're equal in the sense that Jesus mentioned, but in other ways we're not equal at all. Hebrews 2 verse 5. says, for unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, wherever we speak. But guess what? To us, he has put the world in subjection, because we're going to reign with him. As Paul made clear in 1 Corinthians 6, as John says in Revelation 5 and Revelation 20, we shall reign on the earth, we shall reign with Christ. The Lord has put the future world in subjection to us as co-heirs with Christ. Perhaps, by the way, that's why Peter says, in 1 Peter 1, verse 12, It says, which things the angels desire to look into. There are some things that they can't attain, that we can attain. We will be equal to the angels in some respects. We'll neither marry nor are given in marriage, neither can they die anymore. But in other respects, they are not equal. So I would still say that God does not call angels sons. Further, the phrase, sons of God, I believe. would never be used in God's Word, I believe, to describe rebellious angels who allegedly conspired together to corrupt the bloodline of mankind with the goal of thwarting God's plan to send the promised Messiah through that bloodline. To do so, I believe, would be a contradiction and a repudiation. In Romans 8, verse 14, it says, For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. which I believe is just as true in the Old Testament as it is in the New. To suggest then that the Holy Ghost ascribes the title of sons of God to actual devils, I believe is ludicrous. 1 John 3, verse 1. It says, Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God. Therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. He is saying that to be called the son of God. is a special, honored, and a privileged position that is not given to the unbelieving or to the unregenerate. And I believe the writing to the Hebrews makes it quite clear that that title or designation is not given to angels either, especially to fallen angels or to devils who allegedly conspired to corrupt the bloodline of mankind with the goal of thwarting God's plan to send the promised Messiah through that bloodline. By the way, that entire theory, I believe, is without scriptural support and is based in complete speculation and fantasy. There is not one verse of scripture in the entire Bible that supports that theory that angels conspired to corrupt the bloodline of the Messiah. It does sell books, you know, by Tom Horne and Steve Quayle and those guys, Chuck Missler, but it's not in the Bible. We don't see that conspiracy spelled out in the Bible. The only support you find for that theory, anywhere, comes from those who quote the Book of Enoch or from the alleged Book of Enoch, which, by the way, is a fabrication. And it was not written by the Enoch that Jude quoted from, 7th generation from Adam. I have to say that if God calls rebellious devils, rebellious angels, sons of God, in Genesis 6, verse 4, then it is no special privilege for us to be called the sons of God. No special privilege. Objection. So, what about the book of Job, where the phrase, sons of God, means angels? My response is, what about Hebrews 1 verse 5? It says, For unto which of the angels said he at any time, thou art my son? I do not think the book of Job contradicts the book of Hebrews. I actually agree with Brother Jay on this point, that it's far less of a stretch to say that the sons of God that presented themselves before the throne of God in the book of Job were the spirits of departed saints. That's far less of a stretch than to say that the sons of God in Genesis chapter 6 were fallen angelic beings. Revelation 7 verse 9 says, After this I beheld, and lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and peoples, and tongues, stood before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes and palms in their hands, and cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God, which sitteth upon the throne and unto the Lamb. And all the angels stood round about the throne, gathered together with all these men from every nation, tongue, and tribe. The angels stood round about the throne and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God. saying, Amen, blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be unto our God forever and ever. Do you think this occurrence in Revelation chapter 7 was the first time that the spirits of departed saints stood before the throne of God singing His praises? I don't think so. I think that happened before. I think that happened in Job chapter 1 verse 6 and chapter 2 verse 1 and chapter 38 verse 7 as well. And Satan came among them. Except on that particular day, he wasn't leading the choir. On that day, he came to be the accuser of the brethren. There's no reason we can't conclude that the sons of God in the book of Job are the spirits of departed saints, especially in view of Hebrews 1, verse 5. I'm out of time. I need to wrap this up. I could go on for hours on this topic. Maybe I'll come back to it a little bit, talking a little bit more about some of these heresies. Actually, I could talk quite a while on just some of the heresies of Thomas Horne and his book, Apollyon Rising and some of these other books, many contradictions of the scriptures themselves. I won't go there. Deuteronomy 29, 29, I cited that passage earlier. The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. God has not revealed all things to us. But what He has revealed, He has given to us as our property to belong to us and to our children forever. So that we can obey Him, so that we can do His will, so that we can follow Him. And by the way, this book right here is what He has revealed. King James Bible. That's what He has revealed, that's what He has preserved. That's really all we need to know what has been revealed to us. We don't need these extra biblical books. Paul says we are to rightly divide the Scriptures, to separate God's Word from false teachings. We are to divide, separate God's Word from unprofitable words that subvert the hearers. We are to separate God's Word from vain and profane babblings that lead to ungodliness, etc. We are to adhere to God's Word as our sole authority for spiritual truth, and we are to reject the teachings of mere men that are unprofitable diversions. Turn, if you would, please, to Matthew 24. Matthew 24. But as the days of Noah were, verse 37, Matthew 24, verse 37, but as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and knew not until the flood came and took them all away, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. Then shall two be in the field, and one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill, the one shall be taken and the other left. Watch therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come." Christ's point here is that the day of His coming will be a surprise and a shock. It's going to be a horror, actually, to many to find out that they are now doomed. Christ is not here alluding to the rapture. Those that were taken away by the flood, by the way, were the wicked, not the righteous. So shall it be at Christ's coming, where he says here that two shall be in the field and one taken to the other left. It's the wicked that are taken at Christ's coming. The wicked shall be taken off the face of the earth. As Jesus also said in Matthew 13, verse 40, He said, The Son of Man shall send forth His angels, and shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and all things that do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire, and there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. And then shall the righteous shine forth as the Son in the kingdom of their Father. We do not need to add to Christ's words or to His meaning here. He meant that that day is going to come as a surprise. People are going to be going about their normal daily affairs. It's going to be a shock and a surprise. We don't need to add to his meaning here. In fact, I say it's very wrong for us to do that. Christ had no need to mention Nephilim or giants in this passage. Because Nephilim and giants have no bearing on his coming. None. and because his disciples have no need to be concerned about giants and Nephilims and transhumans. The point of Matthew 24, verse 37, is that we are to be vigilant and faithful to Christ until he comes. And when he comes, he wants to find us faithful. Faithful, first of all, first and foremost, to his word as revealed and preserved for us in the King James Bible. There is no reason for us to fear an alien invasion, or a zombie resurrection, or an attack by an entire army of Nephilim. He that is with me is far greater than he that is in the world. The Lord Jesus has promised never to leave me nor to forsake me, and he's promised that he's not going to lose one out of his hand. He's promised that he's not going to lose one of those whom the Father has given to him. Turn to 1 John chapter 3 one more time. We'll close with 1 John chapter 3. Verse 1, 1 John 3 says, Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God. Therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. What a wonderful privilege it is to be called the sons of God. Adam was the son of God. The Lord Jesus was the son of God. And because the second Adam, the Lord Jesus, gave his life to redeem us from our sin, we now who are born again have that special privilege of being called the sons of God. Verse 2, it says, Beloved, now are we the sons of God. And it doth not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that. When he shall appear, we shall be like him. For we shall see him as he is. What a wonderful privilege it is to be called the sons of God. By the way, it's a privilege that fallen angels do not share. Or to which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son. My response to that question, the response that is demanded by that question, is not one. Father in heaven, we do thank you for your word. I pray that you'd help us to take it to heart. Help us to be faithful to it. Help us, Lord. We are seeking truth. We seek to know the truth. Help us to be faithful to it. Help us, Lord, to come to the unity of the faith in this church. Help us all to mature and to grow. Help us to be humble, to be correctable, each one of us, as we grow in maturity. In Jesus' name we do pray. Amen.