Nephilim

[Aristarkos]

Come on, the idea (male) angels can propagate with women remains what it is, an assumption, it's nowhere in Scripture. Also the idea our Bible contains borrowed elements from pagan religions where gods mated with women like rabbits is repulsive. Nevertheless I am stuck at 1 Cor 11:10

That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Which moves us right into Gen 6.

Paul likely being under the influence of the then popular book of Enoch.

Now we know the book of Enoch is not Scripture.

No church I am aware off that teaches women to cover their heads because of the angels.

Are churches disobedient to Scripture?

You really should make a distinction between good obedient angels and fallen angels.

Aristarkos

[ProDeo]

You really should make a distinction between good obedient angels and fallen angels.

Aristarkos

You really should force your wife to be obedient to Scripture.

Tikkie terug

[Aristarkos]

You really should force your wife to be obedient to Scripture.

Tikkie terug

You still really should make the distinction between good obedient angels and fallen angels, which you didn't do in the post I replied to.

Aristarkos

[bluesky22]

I have no idea why you bring this up, but you seem to believe there offspring wasn't far larger then normal human? King Og of Basan slept in a bed ± 4 meters (13 feet) long (Deut. 3:11). Others have six toes on the feet and six fingers on the hands and are huge as well (2 Sam. 21:10). This clearly shows DNA corruption. People do not grow so big, or grow more limbs.

Then there is this guy....https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iXJ8YdRR054 the man with 24 digits. Really neat.

Check this for how big men may have been. The Giant of Casteinau ( 11 feet ish https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_of_Castelnau , but the end of the article says something interesting.

Perhaps the early earths atmosphere was different, or the longer ages that men lived has something to do with it.

[TheDivineWatermark]

Here's a reference to "offspring [plural; G1081 - gennēmata]," but it's not referring to "angels/fallen angels" :

Matthew 23 -

27 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like tombs having been whitewashed, which indeed outwardly appear beautiful, but inside they are full of bones of the dead, and of all impurity. 28 Thus indeed outwardly you also appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
29 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous; 30 and you say, ‘If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you bear witness to yourselves that you are sons of those having murdered the prophets. 32 You, then, fill up the measure of your fathers. 33 Serpents! Offspring of vipers! How shall you escape from the sentence of Gehenna?
34 Because of this, behold, I send to you prophets and wise men and scribes. Some of them you will kill and will crucify, and some of them you will flog in your synagogues, and will persecute from town to town; 35 so that upon you shall come all the righteous blood being poured out upon the earth, from the blood of the righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

[Noeb]

Come on, the idea (male) angels can propagate with women remains what it is, an assumption, it's nowhere in Scripture.

Right, sure, we made it up. We are here together agreeing because it's nowhere in scripture. A view widely held in the first century, supported by Josephus, Philo, Eusebius, and many Ante-Nicene Fathers such as Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, and Commodianus is nowhere in scripture. So to you I say, C'mon! Stop postulating!

Also the idea our Bible contains borrowed elements from pagan religions where gods mated with women like rabbits is repulsive.

I would agree if what I've been talking about was comparable.

Nevertheless I am stuck at 1 Cor 11:10

That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Which moves us right into Gen 6.

Paul likely being under the influence of the then popular book of Enoch.

Now we know the book of Enoch is not Scripture.

No church I am aware off that teaches women to cover their heads because of the angels.

Are churches disobedient to Scripture?

Why are you stuck? There's cultural and religious stuff in scripture not applicable today. There, now you are unstuck.

[BrianW]

Scripture does not definitely state exactly who the Nephilim were and both Jews and Christians have been debating this for ages. Why?

Because there is no definitive proof in Scripture as to if they were the result of fallen angels mating with humans or not. Those claiming that there is are only letting their chosen or taught opinion override what Scripture actually does or does not say.
I'm not saying that those who claim that Nephilim are the offspring of fallen angels are wrong - I'm saying that the claims that it's clear as day in Scripture are wrong. Because it isn't there.

There's also nothing there to refute it but as Athanasius has already said that's a silly and useless argument no matter what is being discussed.

[Aristarkos]

Scripture does not definitely state exactly who the Nephilim were and both Jews and Christians have been debating this for ages. Why?

Because there is no definitive proof in Scripture as to if they were the result of fallen angels mating with humans or not. Those claiming that there is are only letting their chosen or taught opinion override what Scripture actually does or does not say.
I'm not saying that those who claim that Nephilim are the offspring of fallen angels are wrong - I'm saying that the claims that it's clear as day in Scripture are wrong. Because it isn't there.

There's also nothing there to refute it but as Athanasius has already said that's a silly and useless argument no matter what is being discussed.

But it is Brian, all we have to do is believe Scripture in what it says. Sons of God are in the O.T. always angels never human. All one has to do is check where Son of God or Sons of God occurs. Even the N.T. helps us in this by calling Adam a son of God. Everybody directly created by God — no intermediary — is a son of God. That's why those who are the new creation in the N.T. are called son of God.

Aristarkos

[BrianW]

But it is Brian, all we have to do is believe Scripture in what it says. Sons of God are in the O.T. always angels never human.

Aristarkos

I'm sorry but you're incorrect there. Men were referred to as "sons of God" more than once. And I do absolutely believe what Scripture says, thank you very much for inferring that I do not.

[TheDivineWatermark]

I, too, disagree... and believe that that is based on the ASSUMPTION that the SETTING of Job 1 and 2 was up IN HEAVEN (which the text does not support that notion).

[Aristarkos]

I'm sorry but you're incorrect there. Men were referred to as "sons of God" more than once. And I do absolutely believe what Scripture says, thank you very much for inferring that I do not.

Well then supply the Scripture so we all learn something.

Aristarkos

[Aristarkos]

I, too, disagree... and believe that that is based on the ASSUMPTION that the SETTING of Job 1 and 2 was up IN HEAVEN (which the text does not support that notion).

No, it is not, it is based on the term « son(s) of God » in the O.T..

Aristarkos

[ProDeo]

You still really should make the distinction between good obedient angels and fallen angels, which you didn't do in the post I replied to.

Aristarkos

S C R I P T U R E

Paul - That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Paul believes that like in Gen 6 there are angels who lust after women and like in Gen 6 may give in to the temptation hence he warns them for the danger and that they should cover their heads. This because in Nummeri 13:33 we read the Nephilim is back, meaning angels can still fall.

I have been a believer of the angelic version myself, argued here the same way as you (Noeb and others) do and still lean to it but when push comes to shove no one is willing to put his money where his mouth is and tell their wifes to cover their heads because of the angels.

And I want to know why the Church through the centuries have ignored Scripture.

[ProDeo]

Right, sure, we made it up. We are here together agreeing because it's nowhere in scripture. A view widely held in the first century, supported by Josephus, Philo, Eusebius, and many Ante-Nicene Fathers such as Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, and Commodianus is nowhere in scripture. So to you I say, C'mon! Stop postulating!

I would agree if what I've been talking about was comparable.

Why are you stuck? There's cultural and religious stuff in scripture not applicable today. There, now you are unstuck.

See post #208 for answers and if you believe it follow suit and tell women to cover their heads because on a bad day an angel may rape them.

[Aristarkos]

S C R I P T U R E

Paul - That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Paul believes that like in Gen 6 there are angels who lust after women and like in Gen 6 may give in to the temptation hence he warns them for the danger and that they should cover their heads. This because in Nummeri 13:33 we read the Nephilim is back, meaning angels can still fall.

I have been a believer of the angelic version myself, argued here the same way as you (Noeb and others) do and still lean to it but when push comes to shove no one is willing to put his money where is mouth is and tell their wifes to cover their heads because of the angels.

And I want to know why the Church through the centuries have ignored Scripture.

This is a completely other subject, are you sure you want to discuss this here? I've already said it to you before when you brought this up. Does your handkerchief or apron heal people? When a serpent bites you, do you shake it of and just go on with your business? Have you lately raised anybody from the dead? I know the answer is no, so why should our wives wear head cover?

Aristarkos